Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Wymsey]

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, lifted*fox said:

this thread is such a ****ing pit of despair, I don't know why everyone continues to bang their heads against the same brick wall day in, day out. 

 

I gave up contributing to this thread - I've posted serious posts, I've posted wind-up posts, I've posted pigeons and I've posted heart-felt posts that explain clearly the way I have the political beliefs that I do. 

 

my only true criticism of Webbo is that he very rarely shows any of his human side and everything he posts is 'facts' this / 'figures' that - I've never, not once had a single understanding of how any of this political bullshit effects him in real terms. he gives absolutely zero clues as to why he has the political standing / beliefs that he does and he very rarely budges on his opinions even when they're clearly wrong / questionable / difficult to understand.

 

in my opinion it's that inability to talk about who he actually is (as a person) and why he holds the beliefs that he does that makes Webbo a very difficult person to warm to and that's what causes frustration, imo. 

 

there are people on here who hold similar beliefs and have openly admitted it's for purely selfish reasons (Innovindil) but at least it's honest and whilst I can't agree, I know who he is and where you stand with him. 

 

a bit more humility, sense of humour and willingness to back down on some things would go a long way, imo. 

 

If I state an opinion I'm told to provide sources. Say anything on here and there are a dozen people on here desperate to prove you wrong. 

 

I'm desperately sad to hear you can't warm to me though, I was so hoping we could be friends.

[Izzy]

3 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

And you can **** off as well... 

[Rogstanley]

Where is @toddybad these days anyway?

[RumbleFox]

7 minutes ago, Webbo said:

If I state an opinion I'm told to provide sources. Say anything on here and there are a dozen people on here desperate to prove you wrong. 

 

I'm desperately sad to hear you can't warm to me though, I was so hoping we could be friends.

TO be fair, you are a bit annoying.  I mean, I am too, I'm a fvcking atrocious bore most the time but at least I can admit it.  I'm not saying I don;t love you, just that you are an annoying person to argue with.  Not because you present particularly strong arguments but because you simply never seem to listen or respond to people's actual posts.  If someone pulls me up on something I at least have the good grace to think about it.  I am wrong as often as I am right, and sometimes I have written things that have come across in a way that I didn't plan but I am willing to admit that.  Also, you are a massive racist and I probably a beast too. 

Edited 23 February 2018 by RumbleFox

[Izzy]

1 minute ago, Rogstanley said:

Where is @toddybad these days anyway?

I was wondering that.

 

Looks like he last posted in the LCFC section on Monday and on this thread a week ago.

 

Maybe he's actually getting his head down and getting on with some work for once 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

15 minutes ago, RumbleFox said:

I think probably in the same way that you would rightly get annoyed with someone branding you "far right" because you believe in x or y that someone else might feel slightly aggrieved by being labelled "far left" for say, wanting to raise taxes or give more money to those on benefits for example.  I do not think these terms are healthy and I always try to never label someone "a racist" for voting Brexit for example.  I am probably someone you would think is a mad lefty but I probably have more arguments with fellow "lefties" as I hate it when they say things like "all Trump voters are racist" "anyone voting Brexit is a moron", etc because firstly, it is simply not true and, secondly, if achieves nothing.  No one ever changes minds or viewpoints by being offensive.

 

With that in mind....... I do think your use of "far left" just ruins your own arguments slightly as it sounds like something Trump would spout to belittle somebody.  Many of your posts are well written and thought out but, and I can just speak to myself now, the far left stuff just switches me off because it is so generic, vague and often untrue. I think, deep down, most of us just want to get along, have a nice life and enjoy ourselves and most of us are pretty decent people face to face.  Breaking down groups and mobs is the key, seeing people as individuals is so important as mob mentality and "in and out groups" are literally some of the worst parts of human nature and that's why terms like "far right people" and "far left people" just do nothing for me.

 

Having said all that you are a far right, racist nutter spasmo.  X

I do personally feel that Corbyn is far left, that's just my view doesn't make it right of course. Some of his policies to me are extremely concerning as is some of this rhetoric.

 

Anyone on the centre ground, not a problem. Labour with a decent centre left leader I could happily consider myself voting for. I just feel that the direction Labour are heading is not good. Again my personal view.

 

Perhaps it is a little unfair of me to brand all Labour voters 'far left' but I do feel that is where the party is at present. Labour under Corybn is the left wing equivalent of UKIP. Corbyn, McDonnell and the shadow cabinet have questionable and divisive visions in my view. The actions of Momentum and Seamus Milne are often quite abhorrent, some of the abuse the centre left MPs and Tories has received from this hate group is quote disgusting and I do not really know how any decent person can stand for that kind of abuse in modern Britain. A lot of their rhetoric surround stirring hate and anger towards those who 'have' by those perceived as 'not having'. Just the other night Corbyn praised a speech by the absolute cretin STORMZY which basically incites the poor to go and burn down rich peoples house so 'they know how it feels' that kind of thing sets a pretty bad standard in my eyes.

 

Every day of the week I have said there are many failings in this government, I would go as far as to say they are incompetent. The problems for me at present is there is no viable alternative mainly because Labour led by momentum are on a route to the left.

 

I am deffo a right wing nutter spazo nasty evil tory **** who eats foxes for breakfast though!

Edited 23 February 2018 by Foxin_mad

[Webbo]

8 minutes ago, RumbleFox said:

TO be fair, you are a bit annoying.  I mean, I am too, I'm a fvcking atrocious bore most the time but at least I can admit it.  I'm not saying I don;t love you, just that you are an annoying person to argue with.  Not because you present particularly string arguments but because you simply never seem to listen or respond to people's actual posts.  If someone pulls me up on something I at least have the good grace to think about it.  I am wrong as often as I am right, and sometimes I have written things that have come across in a way that I didn't plan but I am willing to admit that.  Also, you are a massive racist and I probably a beast too. 

You're not a bore Rumbly, can I call you Rumbly?,I know I can be annoying, sometimes I want to be because somebody's annoyed me. I've said I'll tone it down and I'll genuinely try.

 

Some people make the mistake that this thread is for the free exchange of ideas that can lead to a wider understanding. In actual fact it's all about posturing, name calling and point scoring, nobody ever changes their mind about anything. It's what the internet was invented for.

[lifted*fox]

4 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Say anything on here and there are a dozen people on here desperate to prove you wrong. 

 

and you're one of them Webbo - you probably get it worse in return though because people push harder to see if there's another side to you. 

 

I don't think I've ever seen you talk once about how a political choice affects your personal life so it always seems like you make your argument for the 'state' and I struggle, as I'm sure others do to find anything relatable in that. 

 

you come across as a cold man with only self-interest at heart. if that's the case, state it. if there's something a bit more human going on inside then you'd do well to show it and maybe people wouldn't be on your case so much. 

[Wymsey]

Is freedom of speeech allowed on here?

[Rogstanley]

15 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

You what!?!

 

I said nothing of the sort. 

@Webbo

 

 

[Webbo]

Just now, Rogstanley said:

@Webbo

 

 

I can't bothered to look, you know the post I'm on about, you find it.

[Alf Bentley]

7 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Just for facecloth.

 

I said this to donut;

When I said remainers I meant those campaigning for remain, the same people who claimed there'd be recession by now, there'd be another 500k unemployed, we all believed what was written on the bus and we were only bothered about blue passports. They are quite clearly lies. I didn't mean to imply all those that support remain, sorry for the misunderstanding. I got this in reply;

Quite how my post could be interpreted as shouty I don't know but it's hard to judge tone on the internet. He subsequently called me a twat. Personally I think I was more sinned against than sinner but people will have to make up their own minds.

It's nothing like Nazi propaganda. There are people in academia who are frightened to speak out against the groupthink because they think it will affect their career. If you don't think there are people out there who think brexiteers aren't Nazis and imbeciles you clearly haven't been reading this thread.

Saying replace Brexiteers with remainers is clearly nonsense, nobody in academia faces prejudice for being pro remain.

Of course she would say many remainers or many scientist. It's impossible to say 100% of any group believe the same thing.

 

I don't believe we should be denied what's best for our country because a majority of foreign countries who may not be facing the same problems as us vote against it.

 

 

There, there's 20 minutes of my life I won't get back and Facecloth can still tell me I'm wrong.

 

 

Predictably, I'm about to go out again but will try to reply - briefly - over the weekend.

 

My central point was that the Melanie Phillips article, which you posted approvingly, was a dishonest travesty of my views, misrepresenting most or all Remainers and others as oppressive, anti-democratic extremists. I only see a minority of Brexit supporters as being like that so am disappointed that you think it's fair for most or all Reminers to be depicted as such. 

 

I don't believe that we should be denied what is best for our city (Leicester) - namely Labour policies - because a majority from elsewhere impose Tory policies on us..... Well, tough shit for me! Leicester is part of the UK, I'm a democrat and the nation voted for Tory policies. Likewise, the UK is currently part of the EU so you have to accept majority decisions at that level. I understand that you don't want to be in the EU, but while you are, you have to accept it when the UK loses majority votes.

 

Mind you, I do agree with @Innovindil that we "all just need to admit we're cvnts and jog on"! 

[Rogstanley]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

I can't bothered to look, you know the post I'm on about, you find it.

I know exactly what I said so I don't need to find it. I certainly didn't say what you claimed I did. 

 

What I said was that right wing rhetoric was partially responsible for that man's desire to kill muslims, which is 100% correct in the same way as jihadist propaganda is partially responsible for motivating jihadi's.

 

If you took that to mean that I thought you approved of the attack you were wrong, plain and simple, and I struggle to see how you could have arrived at that conclusion from what I said.

 

[Webbo]

8 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Predictably, I'm about to go out again but will try to reply - briefly - over the weekend.

 

My central point was that the Melanie Phillips article, which you posted approvingly, was a dishonest travesty of my views, misrepresenting most or all Remainers and others as oppressive, anti-democratic extremists. I only see a minority of Brexit supporters as being like that so am disappointed that you think it's fair for most or all Reminers to be depicted as such. 

 

I don't believe that we should be denied what is best for our city (Leicester) - namely Labour policies - because a majority from elsewhere impose Tory policies on us..... Well, tough shit for me! Leicester is part of the UK, I'm a democrat and the nation voted for Tory policies. Likewise, the UK is currently part of the EU so you have to accept majority decisions at that level. I understand that you don't want to be in the EU, but while you are, you have to accept it when the UK loses majority votes.

 

Mind you, I do agree with @Innovindil that we "all just need to admit we're cvnts and jog on"! 

If we took your argument to it's conclusion then every house would make it's own laws. The UK has been an entity for more than 200 years, we all speak the same language, watch the same same news, read the same papers, live under the same conditions. We're the best people to decide what's best for us. Just the same as I don't think we should have a role in running Romania because we don't have the knowledge and experience to understand what's best for them.

 

I didn't say and neither did Melanie Phillips say they represented your views. She was talking about academics in academia.

[leicsmac]

31 minutes ago, Webbo said:

It's nothing like Nazi propaganda. There are people in academia who are frightened to speak out against the groupthink because they think it will affect their career. If you don't think there are people out there who think brexiteers aren't Nazis and imbeciles you clearly haven't been reading this thread.

 

 

1

As I have said before, if Ms Phillips thinks this is true then let her prove it (as well as ID, if she wouldn't mind) with evidence harder than hearsay and innuendo.

 

Until then, propaganda (though probably not Nazi) is exactly what she's saying here. Telling the base that she appeals to exactly what they want to hear, and disparaging a community that in no way deserves it.

[Alf Bentley]

3 minutes ago, Webbo said:

If we took your argument to it's conclusion then every house would make it's own laws. The UK has been an entity for more than 200 years, we all speak the same language, watch the same same news, read the same papers, live under the same conditions. We're the best people to decide what's best for us. Just the same as I don't think we should have a role in running Romania because we don't have the knowledge and experience to understand what's best for them.

 

Obviously, I don't think Leicester should be an independent country. I was trying to make the point that we all have to accept the decisions of organisations of which we're members - until such time as we leave.

 

You are making a case for leaving the EU. I could make the case for not doing so. But that's not the point. While we are members, we have to accept legitimate decisions. As EU members, if we're outvoted at the European Council or European Parliament, we have to accept it. Likewise, if my Leicester Labour MPs are outvoted by Tories at Westminster, I have to accept it. Similarly, if your Hard Brexit MPs are outvoted on the customs union amendment by a combination of Labour and Remainer Tories, you'll have to accept it. Nobody is "imposing" anything on anyone.

 

Must go now. Speak over the weekend! 

[Webbo]

Just now, leicsmac said:

As I have said before, if Ms Phillips thinks this is true then let her prove it (as well as ID, if she wouldn't mind) with evidence harder than hearsay and innuendo.

 

Until then, propaganda (though probably not Nazi) is exactly what she's saying here. Telling the base that she appeals to exactly what they want to hear, and disparaging a community that in no way deserves it.

 I'm taking on all comers today.

 

Melanie Phillips said she attended a secret meeting between academics to discuss ID, are you saying she's lying?

[Rogstanley]

15 minutes ago, Webbo said:

If we took your argument to it's conclusion then every house would make it's own laws. The UK has been an entity for more than 200 years, we all speak the same language, watch the same same news, read the same papers, live under the same conditions. We're the best people to decide what's best for us. Just the same as I don't think we should have a role in running Romania because we don't have the knowledge and experience to understand what's best for them.

 

I didn't say and neither did Melanie Phillips say they represented your views. She was talking about academics in academia.

I suspect there's a few British people around who disagree with the idea that you know what's best for them just because you're also British. 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Webbo said:

 I'm taking on all comers today.

 

Melanie Phillips said she attended a secret meeting between academics to discuss ID, are you saying she's lying?

I'm saying the meeting (likely) existed and was secret, but the reasons for keeping it secret, viz. being ostracised from the scientific community if it got out they were there, are false and an exaggeration on the part of the attendees, in my own opinion.

 

Again, making it all cloak and dagger smacks of imagery, of simply wanting to appear afraid and victims of those godless preachers of scientism who will burn us at the stake (or our careers, anyway) if they find out what's going on.

[Webbo]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm saying the meeting (likely) existed and was secret, but the reasons for keeping it secret, viz. being ostracised from the scientific community if it got out they were there, are false and an exaggeration on the part of the attendees, in my own opinion.

 

Again, making it all cloak and dagger smacks of imagery, of simply wanting to appear afraid and victims of those godless preachers of scientism who will burn us at the stake (or our careers, anyway) if they find out what's going on.

Why would they fake it if everything was free and open? Why not just broadcast their ideas to the widest possible audience? If Melanie Phillips hadn't mentioned it we wouldn't even have known it happened.

[Buce]

36 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

I do personally feel that Corbyn is far left, that's just my view doesn't make it right of course. Some of his policies to me are extremely concerning as is some of this rhetoric.

 

Anyone on the centre ground, not a problem. Labour with a decent centre left leader I could happily consider myself voting for. I just feel that the direction Labour are heading is not good. Again my personal view.

 

Perhaps it is a little unfair of me to brand all Labour voters 'far left' but I do feel that is where the party is at present. Labour under Corybn is the left wing equivalent of UKIP. Corbyn, McDonnell and the shadow cabinet have questionable and divisive visions in my view. The actions of Momentum and Seamus Milne are often quite abhorrent, some of the abuse the centre left MPs and Tories has received from this hate group is quote disgusting and I do not really know how any decent person can stand for that kind of abuse in modern Britain. A lot of their rhetoric surround stirring hate and anger towards those who 'have' by those perceived as 'not having'. Just the other night Corbyn praised a speech by the absolute cretin STORMZY which basically incites the poor to go and burn down rich peoples house so 'they know how it feels' that kind of thing sets a pretty bad standard in my eyes.

 

Every day of the week I have said there are many failings in this government, I would go as far as to say they are incompetent. The problems for me at present is there is no viable alternative mainly because Labour led by momentum are on a route to the left.

6

 

This is why you get dog's abuse - you just make shit up, then use it as a stick to beat Corbyn and Labour.

 

What was actually said was:

 

"Yo Theresa May, where’s the money for Grenfell?"

"What, you thought we just forgot about Grenfell? You criminals, and you’ve got the cheek to call us savages, you should do some jail time, you should pay some damages, you should burn your house down and see if you can manage this."

 

 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Why would they fake it if everything was free and open? Why not just broadcast their ideas to the widest possible audience?

Again, imagery.

 

They want to appear victimised because that's a narrative that's appealing to them and they also know that their theory holds little water in the community and so doing this - rather paradoxically - actually gets them more attention from outside the community than they would have gotten otherwise. I mean, "ID proponents have to stage secret meeting for fear of career ruination" gets more people talking than "ID proponents float theory in paper, gunned down by peer review process", doesn't it?

 

Most importantly, however, they know that they don't have evidence to satisfy peer review within the community for their ideas, so if they were to broadcast them they know they would get dismissed for that reason - so they have to try another route to popularise it.

 

[Buce]

46 minutes ago, Wymeswold fox said:

Is freedom of speeech allowed on here?

 

For some.

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Again, imagery.

 

They want to appear victimised because that's a narrative that's appealing to them and they also know that their theory holds little water in the community and so doing this - rather paradoxically - actually gets them more attention from outside the community than they would have gotten otherwise. I mean, "ID proponents have to stage secret meeting for fear of career ruination" gets more people talking than "ID proponents float theory in paper, gunned down by peer review process", doesn't it?

 

Most importantly, however, they know that they don't have evidence to satisfy peer review within the community for their ideas, so if they were to broadcast them they know they would get dismissed for that reason - so they have to try another route to popularise it.

 

This is from a new group, briefing for brexit.

Quote

 

Since the Brexit referendum vote, we, like many people, have been shocked and disturbed by two things. First, the undisguised contempt expressed by a minority of influential and very vocal people in Britain – not to mention in other countries – for the majority of our fellow citizens, who have been accused of a variety of sins from ignorance to racism, and non infrequently crudely insulted.

Second, by the wave of exaggerated and often simply dishonest propaganda that has been deployed to try to undermine both the Brexit vote and the attempts of the British government to negotiate our withdrawal.

Some of us who hold academic positions have been particularly alarmed by this, because a number of academic colleagues and students have joined in the chorus. Academics, especially in subjects that have a direct impact on political opinions and government policies, have a duty – which they often claim with gusto – to analyse and inform.

But for this duty to be exercised honestly and fruitfully, group prejudices and personal interests must be put to one side. Dispassionate analysis can enrich democratic debate. But too many academics – led by the official institutions that employ them – appear to have been swayed by their own individual and corporate advantage. Others seem content to represent an ivory-tower elite, insensitive to the wider national interest – including the interest of people less privileged than themselves.

It is an intellectual failure for the academic community to have been so overwhelmingly harnessed to a single point of view. For this reason, it has made a negligible contribution to a national debate of huge importance.

Academics should scrutinise and question, not echo. No less disturbing is the fact that a considerable number of scholars, especially in fairly junior positions, feel that if they are intellectually honest and express views favouring Brexit, their careers will suffer. We are sorry to say that we think they are right to be worried.

A small group of us decided that we had to speak out, hence the establishment of Briefings for Brexit. As ‘experts’ in a variety of subjects, we were angered by the distortions that were being used to browbeat the electorate. Some of us had voted Leave, and some Remain, but we agreed that the issue had been legally and democratically decided, and to try to reverse the decision was sterile, divisive and frankly dangerous.

We quickly found, by spontaneous word of mouth, that there were others who felt the same. We have not attempted to recruit a large group (though we are happy to welcome allies inside and outside academia), and we certainly remain a minority within universities. But our primary aim is not to count academic heads. Rather, we intend to put forward reasoned and solidly based analyses to scrutinise and expose unexamined assumptions, myths, and downright falsehoods.

We are happy for other colleagues to take a different view, and to disagree and debate: that is our job. But we must stop sterile refighting of the referendum. Let the country hear the real arguments. It is our job as academics to help our fellow citizens to understand what is happening and where the country now needs to go.

 

I believe it was originally a letter to the Times but it's re printed here http://brexitcentral.com/fellow-academics-must-stop-pushing-dishonest-anti-brexit-propaganda/

 

Yet again it might be melodramatic posturing to gain sympathy but I find it believable.