The Political Thread

[The Legendary Shark]

And don't forget the Sarah Palin parody from Iron Sky

[M.I.K.]

Iron Sky doesn't count. Not Hollywood.

[Steve Green]

Leaked tape of Surrey's council tax government 'deal'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-39198308

[The Legendary Shark]

Iron Sky doesn't count. Not Hollywood.

Pfah! Everybody knows Hollywood just makes fake movies with the sole purpose of undermining the Finnish, German and Australian movie industries. As the Donald probably said, "When Hollywood sends its movies, they're not sending the best. They're not portraying you, they're portraying people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems to us. They're portraying drugs. They're portraying crime. They're portraying rapists... And some, I assume, are portraying good people. It's time to make Australia, Finland and Germany great again! Ooh, that reminds me, have my Dutch DVDs arrived yet?"

[Theblazeuk]

... Hollywood consistently portrays presidents as heroic and noble ...

One each, from the eighties, nineties, noughties, and teens. Ivan Reitman's Dave is about a nice guy staging an illegal coup against an asshole POTUS, Harrison Ford realised The Thing had infiltrated the Oval Office, and this prick was going to let his press secretary take a heat ray to the face.

The thing that baffles me at the moment is that despite all these heels as POTUS, they all still seem to be more believable characters than the real incumbent... more rational, more reasonable, more convincing (whatever secrets or flaws they hold). President Trump would celebrate his great deal with Zod, wonderful guy. The best. Honoured to be talking to the REAL PEOPLE of Krypton.

[JayzusB.Christ]

It's often the way, Nige, when you're a banned word.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39223156

[I, Cosh]

It's often the way, Nige, when you're a quoted banned word.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39223156

As always, it's hard to know if these pricks mean anything that comes out of their mouths but this seems to be so mind-bogglingly lacking in self awareness that it's probably genuine.

[JayzusB.Christ]

Shared by our own Richmond Clements on Facebook. Read the whole thing before you smash your computer / phone in disgust

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/justiceforkatiehopkins

[IndigoPrime]

Heh. Nice twist.

[Frank]

Are you baffled that - despite spending hours of every day telling people who disagree with you on the internet they're stupid and/or terrible people - the world doesn't appear to be coming round to your way of thinking? This is for you.

[The Legendary Shark]

Good talk, I enjoyed that. How she felt when she left her church (Westboro) particularly resonated with how I felt when I left mine (Statism). Her four elements for useful debate are also very cool and level-headed. In fact, she's convinced me to take Jim off ignore.

Thanks for the link, Frank.

[Frank]

Her four elements for useful debate are also very cool and level-headed.

Thanks for taking the time to click on the link. Here are those four guidelines and the edited highlights of her short but affecting talk on how to make the world better, rather than venting anger to make yourself feel better:



1/ Don't assume bad intent

2/ Ask questions

3/ Stay calm

4/ Make the argument

I grew up in the Westboro Baptist Church. Here's why I left, by Megan Phelps-Roper (@meganphelps)

I was five years old when I joined my family on the picket line for the first time. Life was framed as an epic battle between good and evil. The good was my church and its members, and the evil was everyone else. This was the focus of our whole lives and I believed what I was taught with all my heart.

Initially, the people I encountered on Twitter were just as hostile as I expected. They were the digital version of the screaming hordes I'd been seeing at protests since I was a kid. But in the midst of that digital brawl, a strange pattern developed.

Someone would arrive at my profile with the usual rage and scorn, I would respond with a custom mix of Bible verses, pop culture references and smiley faces, but then a conversation would ensue. And it was civil — full of genuine curiosity on both sides.

There was no confusion about our positions, but the line between friend and foe was becoming blurred. We'd started to see each other as human beings, and it changed the way we spoke to one another.

It took time, but eventually these conversations planted seeds of doubt in me. My friends on Twitter took the time to understand Westboro's doctrines, and in doing so, they were able to find inconsistencies I'd missed my entire life.

The truth is that the care shown to me by these strangers on the internet was itself a contradiction. It was growing evidence that people on the other side were not the demons I'd been led to believe.

In spite of overwhelming grief and terror, I left Westboro in 2012. People who had no reason at all to give me a second chance after a lifetime of antagonism. And yet, unbelievably, they did. People had every reason to doubt my sincerity, but most of them didn't. Given my history, it was more than I could've hoped for — forgiveness and the benefit of the doubt. It still amazes me.

That period was full of turmoil, but one part I've returned to often is a surprising realization I had during that time — that it was a relief and a privilege to let go of the harsh judgments that instinctively ran through my mind about nearly every person I saw. I realized that now I needed to learn. I needed to listen.

This has been at the front of my mind lately, because I see in our public discourse so many of the same destructive impulses that ruled my former church. We celebrate tolerance and diversity more than at any other time in memory, and still we grow more and more divided.

We want good things — justice, equality, freedom, dignity, prosperity — but the path we've chosen looks so much like the one I walked away from four years ago.

We've broken the world into us and them, only emerging from our bunkers long enough to lob rhetorical grenades at the other camp. We write off half the country as out-of-touch liberal elites or racist misogynist bullies. No nuance, no complexity, no humanity.

Even when someone does call for empathy and understanding for the other side, the conversation nearly always devolves into a debate about who deserves more empathy. And just as I learned to do, we routinely refuse to acknowledge the flaws in our positions or the merits in our opponent's.

Compromise is anathema. We even target people on our own side when they dare to question the party line. This path has brought us cruel, sniping, deepening polarization, and even outbreaks of violence. I remember this path. It will not take us where we want to go.

What gives me hope is that we can do something about this. The good news is that it's simple, and the bad news is that it's hard. It's hard because righteous indignation, that sense of certainty that ours is the right side, is so seductive.

I will always be inspired to do so by those people I encountered on Twitter, apparent enemies who became my beloved friends. There was nothing special about the way I responded to him. What was special was their approach.

I thought about it a lot over the past few years and I found four things they did differently that made real conversation possible. These four steps were small but powerful, and I do everything I can to employ them in difficult conversations today.

The first is don't assume bad intent. My friends on Twitter realized that even when my words were aggressive and offensive, I sincerely believed I was doing the right thing. Assuming ill motives almost instantly cuts us off from truly understanding why someone does and believes as they do.

The second is ask questions. We can't present effective arguments if we don't understand where the other side is actually coming from and because it gives them an opportunity to point out flaws in our positions. It signals to someone that they're being heard.

When my friends on Twitter stopped accusing and started asking questions, I almost automatically mirrored them. Their questions gave me room to speak, but they also gave me permission to ask them questions and to truly hear their responses. It fundamentally changed the dynamic of our conversation.

The third is stay calm. Dialing up the volume and the snark is natural in stressful situations, but it tends to bring the conversation to an unsatisfactory, explosive end. People often lament that digital communication makes us less civil, but this is one advantage that online conversations have over in-person ones. We have a buffer of time and space between us and the people whose ideas we find so frustrating. Instead of lashing out, we can pause, breathe, change the subject or walk away, and then come back to it when we're ready.

And finally ... make the argument. This might seem obvious, but one side effect of having strong beliefs is that we sometimes assume that the value of our position is or should be obvious and self-evident, that we shouldn't have to defend our positions because they're so clearly right and good that if someone doesn't get it, it's their problem — that it's not my job to educate them.

My friends on Twitter didn't abandon their beliefs or their principles — only their scorn. They channeled their infinitely justifiable offense and came to me with pointed questions tempered with kindness and humor. They approached me as a human being, and that was more transformative than two full decades of outrage, disdain and violence.

Each one of us contributes to the communities and the cultures and the societies that we make up. The end of this spiral of rage and blame begins with one person who refuses to indulge these destructive, seductive impulses. We just have to decide that it's going to start with us.

https://www.ted.com/talks/megan_phelps_roper_i_grew_up_in_the_westboro_baptist_church_here_s_why_i_left/transcript?language=en#t-905625

[JayzusB.Christ]

I only listened to that yesterday. Great stuff. 

[Modern Panther]

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the second round of the popular gameshow...Lets All Leave A Union.

In this round, you'll gain points for counting the number of times the following phrases are thrown at you over the next two years.  Are you ready?  The Words Of Fear are...

Spanish Veto.  Dependence on Oil.  Separatist.  Deficit Worse Than Greece.  Scoxit.  Will of the People.  Narrowminded.  Dangerous.  Kilt.  Once in a Generation.  One Party State.  Petty Nationalism.  Hadrian's Wall.  Anti-English.  Complicated.  Queen Nicola.  Subsidies. Cybernat.   Jock.  Porridge.  Junkie.  Ruled by Brussels.  JK Rowling.  Braveheart.  Ukip.  Flooded by Immigrants.

Good luck everyone!

[Proudhuff]

I love that every news channel I've listened to says The First Minister is threatening Indy2, it maybe a threat to you, but its a lifeline to us.

ps we can move the border south a bit so the world's biggest Dredd collection is in Jockland.