Also in the News - Part 2

[leicsmac]

[Jon the Hat]

7 hours ago, Fox in the North said:

How is Farage even remotely newsworthy. 

He has been a hugely influential political figure for the past decade.  Just because you don't like him or agree with him doesn't make him irrelevant.

 

Meanwhile Natwest / Coutts have made themselves look like lying fools, which is certainly news.

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

He has been a hugely influential political figure for the past decade.  Just because you don't like him or agree with him doesn't make him irrelevant.

 

Meanwhile Natwest / Coutts have made themselves look like lying fools, which is certainly news.

Just got to wait for him to be outed as an either willing or unwilling Russian asset tbh.

[Jon the Hat]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Just got to wait for him to be outed as an either willing or unwilling Russian asset tbh.

The National Crime agency has been through the books and established there was no illegal funding or activity involved in the Leave.EU campaign.  I don't suppose the rumours will ever go away, but it seems unlikely there is any direct links.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

The National Crime agency has been through the books and established there was no illegal funding or activity involved in the Leave.EU campaign.  I don't suppose the rumours will ever go away, but it seems unlikely there is any direct links.

I'm pretty sure that Leave.EU wasn't the only opportunity the guy has had to receive Kremlin largesse. His current stance on the Ukraine situation, for one.

[Zear0]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Never a truer word said in jest by Rob there. 

[Fox in the North]

4 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

He has been a hugely influential political figure for the past decade.  Just because you don't like him or agree with him doesn't make him irrelevant.

 

Meanwhile Natwest / Coutts have made themselves look like lying fools, which is certainly news.

Indeed he has been hugely influential. That being said his influence should be over as brexit has been done. All he is now is nothing more than an outdated big brother celebrity who is desperate to keep himself in the mainstream news and some how people still entertain him. 

[Daggers]

Farage is the political equivalent of a Big Brother contestant’s instagram account, famous for being famous. Tories read his updates and believe that since he vocalises what most of their OAP members think he represents a large body of opinion in society. Media cover and covert  him in the name of ‘balance’, in the sense that flat earthers should provide their opinion on NASA space programmes. He’s symptomatic of a broken system and a ruptured society.

[Jon the Hat]

12 minutes ago, Daggers said:

Farage is the political equivalent of a Big Brother contestant’s instagram account, famous for being famous. Tories read his updates and believe that since he vocalises what most of their OAP members think he represents a large body of opinion in society. Media cover and covert  him in the name of ‘balance’, in the sense that flat earthers should provide their opinion on NASA space programmes. He’s symptomatic of a broken system and a ruptured society.

I think he represents a lot more of society than any of us would like unfortunately.  The dickheads outside immigrant accommodation aren't tory voting OAPs for a start.

[Daggers]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I think he represents a lot more of society than any of us would like unfortunately.  The dickheads outside immigrant accommodation aren't tory voting OAPs for a start.

No, they’re fascists who belong to a far-right group that should be proscribed.

[Lionator]

I think Farage was good at tapping into the unspoken frustration that people had, but he promised people solutions that have turned out to be, predictably, incorrect. So apart from to the extremes, I think he’s done as a political entity. He’s also a massive hypocrite. 

[dsr-burnley]

7 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

He has been a hugely influential political figure for the past decade.  Just because you don't like him or agree with him doesn't make him irrelevant.

 

Meanwhile Natwest / Coutts have made themselves look like lying fools, which is certainly news.

And even bigger news, that a major utility company (or several of them) believe that they can refuse to have people as customers simply because they don't like their politics.  I suspect the public outcry about fascism (because that's particularly what fascism does, it bans people from having certain opinions) would be greater if, for example, trade union leaders were to have their accounts closed because the banks don't like strikes.

Edited 25 July 2023 by dsr-burnley

[Grebfromgrebland]

I dunno seeing as the rise of fascism and 2 world wars was responsible for the deaths of millions of people it should be entirely reasonable to be able to refuse business to fascists and their supporters.

 

Let's not start pretending fascism should be a protected characteristic.

[foxile5]

20 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

I dunno seeing as the rise of fascism and 2 world wars was responsible for the deaths of millions of people it should be entirely reasonable to be able to refuse business to fascists and their supporters.

 

Let's not start pretending fascism should be a protected characteristic.

'FrEeDoM oF sPeEcH'

 

People forget that doesn't mean immunity of consequence and we're living in a society where the shriekiest wheel gets the preferential treatment.

 

 

[Greg2607]

 

well this is relatively alarming isn't it. 

 

essentially, the sea ice in the antarctic, is now so low, in comparison to historical norms, that it is a 1-in a 1 billion year event.... 

 

 

Edited 25 July 2023 by Greg2607

[leicsmac]

47 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

I dunno seeing as the rise of fascism and 2 world wars was responsible for the deaths of millions of people it should be entirely reasonable to be able to refuse business to fascists and their supporters.

 

Let's not start pretending fascism should be a protected characteristic.

Thing is, those on the other side will then point to the thing that fascism supposedly arose to combat - communism - and its own death toll, which isn't exactly small.

 

So all of this then becomes a pretty difficult debate tbh.

[Alf Bentley]

15 hours ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

I'm scratching my head as to why the Mail On Sunday did a front page on the 'vile' documentary being put together about lying in politics, which includes an investigation into whether a certain bumbling ex PM fibbed about being gravely ill with COVID-19, the net result of this now being:

 

a) a lot more people now know about the allegation than before

b) a lot more people now know about the documentary than before

c) the extra attention has resulted in an upsurge in its funding

 

I'd guess that the paper's motivation is to help create a paranoid, ultra-partisan bunker mentality among people inclined to vote Tory who might otherwise be put off by Tory failures & shenanigans in govt.

Such a mentality has helped Trump in the USA, where vast numbers of voters deny things that are demonstrably true (not just arguable) because they've instinctively retreated into a bunker and will support "their side" regardless.

 

For once, I doubt there's any truth in the allegation that Johnson lied. It's possible that he got especially careful treatment due to being PM, but that would likely have been the case for any PM. As a bloke primarily motivated by his narcissistic ego, who fantasises that he's a new Churchill, I doubt he'd have chosen to be in hospital during a national crisis.

 

But getting potential Tory voters jeering at dubious anti-Tory allegations makes it easier for right-wing media to also get them jeering at justifiable allegations of Tory misconduct (Partygate, PPE corruption, economic mismanagement etc.), just as Trump supporters won't even listen to provable allegations against him.

 

I'm sure sales/profits come into it, too. Whipping up a bunker mentality probably boosts sales - many naturally right-wing voters will want to read about scurrilous attacks by the left, just as many partisan left-wing voters will want to read Guardian articles about the Tories being vile.

 

I'm already anticipating that the next election will be even filthier than previous elections, among both politicians and media. I suspect we'll end up feeling nostalgic for the innocent days of Miliband's bacon sandwich. This lot won't easily relinquish their power to benefit their own. Just look at the accusations already from Schapps & that "decent" PM Sunak that Labour is "the political wing of Just Stop Oil" or that Just Stop Oil "bankrolls" Labour. https://fullfact.org/news/just-stop-oil-funding-labour-pmqs/

 

It'll be a tough one for Labour to handle at the election. There are genuine issues about misconduct in office that need to be raised, yet they'll be met by largely dishonest counter-accusations from the other side - and there might be a temptation to throw a lot of mud at the Tories in return, which I think would be a big mistake. Voters would just conclude "they're all as bad as one another" and switch off from genuine issues, which might suit the Tories and their media backers very nicely. Labour will somehow need to ensure voters remember the bad stuff (hopefully voters' memories haven't faded by then, anyway) but avoid ending up in the gutter. They need to keep negative messages clear but low-key and focus on positive messages, I reckon.

[dsr-burnley]

14 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

For once, I doubt there's any truth in the allegation that Johnson lied. It's possible that he got especially careful treatment due to being PM, but that would likely have been the case for any PM. As a bloke primarily motivated by his narcissistic ego, who fantasises that he's a new Churchill, I doubt he'd have chosen to be in hospital during a national crisis.

 

But getting potential Tory voters jeering at dubious anti-Tory allegations ....

If you say that you doubt that Johnson lied about being in hospital and that the claims that he lied are dubious, then you are saying that it's a possibility.  And you are also saying that Jenny McGee from Invercargill may be a liar, and presumably that Luis Pitarma may be a liar, and surely the fact that you hate Boris Johnson is not enough to proclaim these two nurses as potential liars?

 

Or put another way, the suggestion that Johnson wasn't in hospital is as likely as the suggestion that Elvis was in the next bed.  I don't know why you would give it house room.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/13/new-zealand-nhs-nurse-blown-away-boris-johnson-thanks-jenny-mcgee

[Innovindil]

14 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I'd guess that the paper's motivation is to help create a paranoid, ultra-partisan bunker mentality among people inclined to vote Tory who might otherwise be put off by Tory failures & shenanigans in govt.

Such a mentality has helped Trump in the USA, where vast numbers of voters deny things that are demonstrably true (not just arguable) because they've instinctively retreated into a bunker and will support "their side" regardless.

 

For once, I doubt there's any truth in the allegation that Johnson lied. It's possible that he got especially careful treatment due to being PM, but that would likely have been the case for any PM. As a bloke primarily motivated by his narcissistic ego, who fantasises that he's a new Churchill, I doubt he'd have chosen to be in hospital during a national crisis.

 

But getting potential Tory voters jeering at dubious anti-Tory allegations makes it easier for right-wing media to also get them jeering at justifiable allegations of Tory misconduct (Partygate, PPE corruption, economic mismanagement etc.), just as Trump supporters won't even listen to provable allegations against him.

 

I'm sure sales/profits come into it, too. Whipping up a bunker mentality probably boosts sales - many naturally right-wing voters will want to read about scurrilous attacks by the left, just as many partisan left-wing voters will want to read Guardian articles about the Tories being vile.

 

I'm already anticipating that the next election will be even filthier than previous elections, among both politicians and media. I suspect we'll end up feeling nostalgic for the innocent days of Miliband's bacon sandwich. This lot won't easily relinquish their power to benefit their own. Just look at the accusations already from Schapps & that "decent" PM Sunak that Labour is "the political wing of Just Stop Oil" or that Just Stop Oil "bankrolls" Labour. https://fullfact.org/news/just-stop-oil-funding-labour-pmqs/

 

It'll be a tough one for Labour to handle at the election. There are genuine issues about misconduct in office that need to be raised, yet they'll be met by largely dishonest counter-accusations from the other side - and there might be a temptation to throw a lot of mud at the Tories in return, which I think would be a big mistake. Voters would just conclude "they're all as bad as one another" and switch off from genuine issues, which might suit the Tories and their media backers very nicely. Labour will somehow need to ensure voters remember the bad stuff (hopefully voters' memories haven't faded by then, anyway) but avoid ending up in the gutter. They need to keep negative messages clear but low-key and focus on positive messages, I reckon.

As a traditional tory voter I'd say the labour campaign should be easiest in my lifetime. Stick to the basics, every time a tory pipes up with "labour are going to spend x amount" reply with tories cost the country x, cost every individual x, raised taxes with nothing to show for it etc etc. 

 

It needs to be on repeat. Again and again and again. Nothing but tories cost people money. 

 

And if that doesn't work and the polls are looking grim in the run up, a jump into bed with the lib dems for some tactical voting should easily ensure the win. 

[dsr-burnley]

1 hour ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

I dunno seeing as the rise of fascism and 2 world wars was responsible for the deaths of millions of people it should be entirely reasonable to be able to refuse business to fascists and their supporters.

 

Let's not start pretending fascism should be a protected characteristic.

This is the worry.  To a whole lot of people, possibly including yourself, supporting Brexit and Donald Trump appears as fascism.  It is not.

 

You can't stop fascism by burning books and banning freedom of opinion.  This should be obvious.

[SpacedX]

42 minutes ago, Greg2607 said:

 

well this is relatively alarming isn't it. 

 

essentially, the sea ice in the antarctic, is now so low, in comparison to historical norms, that it is a 1-in a 1 billion year event.... 

 

 

And yet depressingly, according to last week's poll, there are 27 members of this forum that think this is "just nature". 

[Jon the Hat]

46 minutes ago, Greg2607 said:

 

well this is relatively alarming isn't it. 

 

essentially, the sea ice in the antarctic, is now so low, in comparison to historical norms, that it is a 1-in a 1 billion year event.... 

 

 

It not really possible to tell over such a short period of data whether this is significant or not.  It is certainly an outlier in the period.

[Dunge]

*Sorry, just seen a load of stuff has been deleted by mods - I get it, so I’ve offed this as well.

Edited 25 July 2023 by Dunge

[foxile5]

47 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

This is the worry.  To a whole lot of people, possibly including yourself, supporting Brexit and Donald Trump appears as fascism.  It is not.

 

You can't stop fascism by burning books and banning freedom of opinion.  This should be obvious.

The respective campaigns of both lean HEAVILY on fascist ideology though, surely you see that?

 

The fear of 'the other'.

Us vs them.

The moral and social superiority of one social grouping over another.

 

Fascism doesn't just leap from 'relatively balanced' to 'Genocidal hatred' in a single step. It's a growing attitude and it is in its infancy with those types of political decisions. Look across mainland Europe. Far right parties are becoming political powers again.

[dsr-burnley]

2 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

The respective campaigns of both lean HEAVILY on fascist ideology though, surely you see that?

 

The fear of 'the other'.

Us vs them.

The moral and social superiority of one social grouping over another.

 

Fascism doesn't just leap from 'relatively balanced' to 'Genocidal hatred' in a single step. It's a growing attitude and it is in its infancy with those types of political decisions. Look across mainland Europe. Far right parties are becoming political powers again.

You don't think the Remain campaign shows any sign of claimed moral superiority of the thickies who voted Brexit?  You haven't been looking very hard!

 

The essential point of fascism IMO is the suppression of the "wrong" opinions.  Stalin and Hitler are opposite sides of the same coin, and it isn't true to say that Stalin couldn't be a fascist because he was nominally a communist or vice versa.  They could do both.