The Politics Thread

[Rincewind]

Maybe he was just better than the alternative. Anyway I cannot remember who or if I voted for in the years after. I vote a lot for an independent candidate and the least unlikeable.Some people tend to believe politicians no matter what they do or say depending on their allegiances.

[Strokes]

Maybe he was just better than the alternative. Anyway I cannot remember who or if I voted for in the years after. I vote a lot for an independent candidate and the least unlikeable.Some people tend to believe politicians no matter what they do or say depending on their allegiances.

There's more than just Blair with blood on their hands though. If the tories can still get tarnished for the choices they made in the 80s, why should labour get a clean slate?

[Rincewind]

I doubt that they ever do. Quite right too. All MP's are answerable to the electorate.

[Jimothy]

There's more than just Blair with blood on their hands though. If the tories can still get tarnished for the choices they made in the 80s, why should labour get a clean slate?

Because a lot of the current labour lot try to distance themselves from the Blair era, whilst the current Tories hold Thatcher on a pedestal as though she was the greatest leader ever.

[Strokes]

Because a lot of the current labour lot try to distance themselves from the Blair era, whilst the current Tories hold Thatcher on a pedestal as though she was the greatest leader ever.

Oh I see, its ok to start an illegal war, so long as you are sorry after. Battle with unions over unsustainable wage demands, rot in hell you bastards.

Nice

[Jimothy]

Oh I see, its ok to start an illegal war, so long as you are sorry after. Battle with unions over unsustainable wage demands, rot in hell you bastards.

Nice

Not what I said is it. The current labour, a lot of whom weren't in the Blair government, and if they were voted against war, have tried to distance themselves from that regime, not wanting to be associated with the decisions made during that time. The current Tories, most of whom were nowhere near the Thatcher government have harked back that era, and tried to connect with it more, seemingly wishing to return to those days.

That's why you can clean Labour slate, but you can't really with the Tories right now.

[Strokes]

Not what I said is it. The current labour, a lot of whom weren't in the Blair government, and if they were voted against war, have tried to distance themselves from that regime, not wanting to be associated with the decisions made during that time. The current Tories, most of whom were nowhere near the Thatcher government have harked back that era, and tried to connect with it more, seemingly wishing to return to those days.

That's why you can clean Labour slate, but you can't really with the Tories right now.

So if the current cabinet apologised for thatchers reign, do you think they would get a clean slate?

[Jimothy]

So if the current cabinet apologised for thatchers reign, do you think they would get a clean slate?

Not apologise, that again is not what I'm saying. They want to be thatcher again they think she amazing, the greatest ever. If they weren't trying to repeat her cuntish behaviour of the 80's people probably wouldn't associate them so much with it. It's not about saying sorry, it about moving away from the mistakes of previous administrations.

[Guest]

I'm not sure I'd be flying the flag which says university education necessarily equates to intelligence, quite so highly. Widespread experience, sound logic and an open mind would be my standard bearers but Amis still hits the nail pretty solidly.       

 

Didn't you get a degree then Thrac?

[Strokes]

Not apologise, that again is not what I'm saying. They want to be thatcher again they think she amazing, the greatest ever. If they weren't trying to repeat her cuntish behaviour of the 80's people probably wouldn't associate them so much with it. It's not about saying sorry, it about moving away from the mistakes of previous administrations.

How do we know what labour would do in a similar situation, there are no war proposals in a manifesto. All they have to distance themselves from it are just empty apologies.

[Thracian]

I doubt that they ever do. Quite right too. All MP's are answerable to the electorate.

 

 

 

 

It's taking a long time for Blair to be answerable to anyone! 

[Jimothy]

[Thracian]

Didn't you get a degree then Thrac?

 

 

 

I was brought up in a caravan in Ratby and there's no way I could afford to go to university. I was married, a father and two years into my training as a journalist by the time I was 19. Having known my wife 50 years today, I should perhaps remind her of the education I missed!     

[Claridge]

Because a lot of the current labour lot try to distance themselves from the Blair era, whilst the current Tories hold Thatcher on a pedestal as though she was the greatest leader ever.

Quite like Blair and Thatcher.

A few mistakes, but on the whole did their best and at least they will be remembered.

Think Thatch will be judged by history(50 years hence) as one of the greatest leaders, not sure Tone will be remembered that way, but labours longest serving leader and all that.

[Rincewind]

A tough read I.speed read it. Maybe someone else can anylise it properly.

 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/byung-chul-han/why-revolution-is-no-longer-possible#.Vi1Lf04EQmg.twitter

[MooseBreath]

A tough read I.speed read it. Maybe someone else can anylise it properly.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/byung-chul-han/why-revolution-is-no-longer-possible#.Vi1Lf04EQmg.twitter

It's an interesting article whose main argument can maybe be summarised as "society is repressive enough to stop people from revolting". I agree that society is repressive to an extent but I don't agree that the level of repression is strong enough to prevent revolution if people really wanted it, at least not in the UK. Maybe things are different in the author's native South Korea.

[Guest]

It's an interesting article whose main argument can maybe be summarised as "society is repressive enough to stop people from revolting". I agree that society is repressive to an extent but I don't agree that the level of repression is strong enough to prevent revolution if people really wanted it, at least not in the UK. Maybe things are different in the author's native South Korea.

 

I haven't read the article but are you suggesting that People COULD revolt in the UK?

[MooseBreath]

I haven't read the article but are you suggesting that People COULD revolt in the UK?

Yes

[Carl the Llama]

I'm with Moose on this, I've always found the people of the UK quite revolting.

[leicsmac]

It's an interesting article whose main argument can maybe be summarised as "society is repressive enough to stop people from revolting". I agree that society is repressive to an extent but I don't agree that the level of repression is strong enough to prevent revolution if people really wanted it, at least not in the UK. Maybe things are different in the author's native South Korea.

 

The author is Korean but has lived in Germany for many years as well as travelled extensively, so I doubt that he is only drawing upon the country of his birth for reference. That being said, I think it applies more over here than in the UK, especially with a rather authoritarian corporatist government in charge right now.

 

Regarding the article itself, he makes several very interesting points, particularly in point of the idea of apathy and self-conflict being cultured within an indivudal in order to make the idea of a revolution impossible - the idea of commercialism and false dreams being fed to people in order to keep them happy in lieu of the truncheon or the gun seems very pertinent. That being said such a thing is difficult to prove, because the whole idea is entirely subjective - you can't tell someone they're being tricked when they don't know it's happening, don't believe it's happening and you can't prove it to them explicitly.

 

Whether or not the influence of such areas is strong enough to prevent wholesale revolt under any circumstances is again purely theoretical. 

[Dr The Singh]

I'm with Moose on this, I've always found the people of the UK quite revolting.

Compared to which other nations???  Believe me, we are far better then majority of nations in the world!!

[Carl the Llama]

Compared to which other nations???  Believe me, we are far better then majority of nations in the world!!

I don't know, India's rape culture and poorly hidden caste divides is pretty disgusting but at least they didn't give the world Katie Hopkins or Piers Morgan.

[bovril]

I don't know, India's rape culture and poorly hidden caste divides is pretty disgusting but at least they didn't give the world Katie Hopkins or Piers Morgan.

Michael Mcintyre is definitely worse than Ceaucescu.

[Dr The Singh]

I don't know, India's rape culture and poorly hidden caste divides is pretty disgusting but at least they didn't give the world Katie Hopkins or Piers Morgan.

It's well worse then that, perpetual slavery, value of life is worth very little..........I could write for hours

 

Instead of Katie and Piers, they have Big B and Sunny Leone

[MooseBreath]

The author is Korean but has lived in Germany for many years as well as travelled extensively, so I doubt that he is only drawing upon the country of his birth for reference. That being said, I think it applies more over here than in the UK, especially with a rather authoritarian corporatist government in charge right now.

Regarding the article itself, he makes several very interesting points, particularly in point of the idea of apathy and self-conflict being cultured within an indivudal in order to make the idea of a revolution impossible - the idea of commercialism and false dreams being fed to people in order to keep them happy in lieu of the truncheon or the gun seems very pertinent. That being said such a thing is difficult to prove, because the whole idea is entirely subjective - you can't tell someone they're being tricked when they don't know it's happening, don't believe it's happening and you can't prove it to them explicitly.

Whether or not the influence of such areas is strong enough to prevent wholesale revolt under any circumstances is again purely theoretical.

I'd be interested to know what he thinks people would be looking for in a revolution if we weren't all pacified through consumerism etc. Because to me it seems that whenever revolution is proposed, in the UK at least, it usually boils down to someone wanting a bit more money with which to be a better consumer. If desire for money, consumerism, materialism etc is all bollox, then surely financial inequality doesn't matter and wouldn't be a trigger for revolution in a newly enlightened society.

What we might revolt about would be things like health care, freedom of expression, education etc but why would we be in revolt when those aspects of society are better now than ever before in history thanks mostly to capitalism? Maybe society is the way it is because this is how people want it to be, rather than being shaped by an undefined, invisible force.