Also In The News

[Alf Bentley]

And the Troll of the Week award goes to......Jeremy Corbyn

 

He's reportedly nominated Bercow for a peerage. 

 

Lord Bercow of Brussels would have a certain ring to it.......or maybe Lord Bercow of Blyth Valley, if they're planning to move the Lords up North (also reported)....

[Kopfkino]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Laurence Fox is somewhat blinded by his privilege in that he'll never experience the world in a way that someone of a different race and sex will and that leaves it open to him not seeing discrimination in places where perhaps some exists.

 

As are people that speak of a blanket 'white male privilege'. Don't get me wrong, I like the phrase as some people use it to signal they are an insufferable cvnt and that's useful. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't deny its existence nor am I pretending it's insignificant(and obviously Laurence Fox is very privileged) and I recognise its often implicit. But it does grate on you when you see privileged folk awarded further privilege based on their skin colour or what they have between their legs whilst less privileged white males don't get those chances. I've never lost my temper as much as I did when I had to walk round Edinburgh with a clearly very privileged woman repeatedly talk about white male comedian's as dirt just cos of 'white male privilege'. 

 

 

In short, it's all gutter discours but will never get any better until we start seeing individuals rather than groups. 

[leicsmac]

14 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

As are people that speak of a blanket 'white male privilege'. Don't get me wrong, I like the phrase as some people use it to signal they are an insufferable cvnt and that's useful. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't deny its existence nor am I pretending it's insignificant(and obviously Laurence Fox is very privileged) and I recognise its often implicit. But it does grate on you when you see privileged folk awarded further privilege based on their skin colour or what they have between their legs whilst less privileged white males don't get those chances. I've never lost my temper as much as I did when I had to walk round Edinburgh with a clearly very privileged woman repeatedly talk about white male comedian's as dirt just cos of 'white male privilege'. 

 

 

In short, it's all gutter discours but will never get any better until we start seeing individuals rather than groups. 

Yeah, you're totally right there - often money (or more accurately the power it accords) lends more privilege to people than other factors do. Ask a coal worker in rural white Appalachia how privileged he feels about his life, for instance - he's probably never been abused and discriminated against purely on behalf of his race or sex but he'll certainly have had some discrimination because of his lack of wealth and location.

 

It's definitely not a blanket thing and tbh the person responding to Fox should have mentioned his position of relative power as an additional factor rather than just the white male thing.

 

It is mostly gutter discourse as you say and quite frankly I despair of the idea that humans might actually realise that they don't need to try to exert power over each other for incredibly petty reasons and it isn't in fact a zero-sum game - not mostly, anyway.

[Guest MattP]

18 hours ago, leicsmac said:

...wasn't aware you found abuse of ethnic minorities by government officials funny @MattP.

Stop being such a pansy and being so prissy. I laughed at the outrageousness of the story. You come across like a 12 year old schoolgirl at times.

 

5 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

And the Troll of the Week award goes to......Jeremy Corbyn

 

He's reportedly nominated Bercow for a peerage. 

 

Lord Bercow of Brussels would have a certain ring to it.......or maybe Lord Bercow of Blyth Valley, if they're planning to move the Lords up North (also reported)....

 

Very amusing, but probably not that clever given how close he is to the bullying scandal.

 

The Lords story is an interesting one, it is even viable? I'd hope so. It would certainly clear a few out as well who are based in London and turn up to pick up 300 a day.

[Milo]

47 minutes ago, MattP said:

Stop being such a pansy and being so prissy. I laughed at the outrageousness of the story. You come across like a 12 year old schoolgirl at times.

 

 

Very amusing, but probably not that clever given how close he is to the bullying scandal.

 

The Lords story is an interesting one, it is even viable? I'd hope so. It would certainly clear a few out as well who are based in London and turn up to pick up 300 a day.

Well, that’s just sexist

[Parafox]

6 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

And the Troll of the Week award goes to......Jeremy Corbyn

 

He's reportedly nominated Bercow for a peerage. 

 

Lord Bercow of Brussels would have a certain ring to it.......or maybe Lord Bercow of Blyth Valley, if they're planning to move the Lords up North (also reported)....

So (as we knew, despite their attempts to disguise it) Corbyn and the supposed neutral Leader of the HoC were in cahoots to block Brexit. What the **** happened to the HoC being without prejudice? 

All bollox.

Bercow is a premier league **** and will not be missed as the leader. He is potentially a fraudster, his wife is/was very suspect in her relationships with other men as is he with other women. There's a whole lot about him/them to think they are vulnerable to corruption from outside agencies. (In my opinion, (for legal reasons))

[Alf Bentley]

45 minutes ago, MattP said:

 

The Lords story is an interesting one, it is even viable? I'd hope so. It would certainly clear a few out as well who are based in London and turn up to pick up 300 a day.

 

It sounds as if it is getting serious consideration: they're considering Birmingham or York, reportedly.

 

Not necessarily a bad idea. Someone on Marr made that same point about weeding out some of those who pick up attendance fees for contributing very little.

 

You'd have thought that modern communications would make most things viable (including between Lords and Commons).

Maybe things like access to historic documents would be a difficulty as I suppose many of those don't exist in multiple copies or in electronic format? 

 

Re. Bercow: Personally, I think he'd be a valuable addition to the Lords if he wants to do it and to make a proper contribution. He'd obviously have a lot of relevant knowledge and expertise.

I take your point about the bullying accusations, but I think he made a great contribution to our democracy despite his egotism & pomposity.....we'll clearly have to agree to disagree on that. 

 

Will/can Johnson reject the proposal? As far as I recall, PMs usually accept Opposition proposals unless someone is clearly unsuitable in some way.....but I might be wrong about that.

Do you know? Could be an awkward irritation for Johnson, though I'm sure he has trickier issues in his in-tray.  

[Alf Bentley]

17 minutes ago, Parafox said:

So (as we knew, despite their attempts to disguise it) Corbyn and the supposed neutral Leader of the HoC were in cahoots to block Brexit. What the **** happened to the HoC being without prejudice? 

All bollox.

Bercow is a premier league **** and will not be missed as the leader. He is potentially a fraudster, his wife is/was very suspect in her relationships with other men as is he with other women. There's a whole lot about him/them to think they are vulnerable to corruption from outside agencies. (In my opinion, (for legal reasons))

 

Don't sit on the fence, mate! 

 

I don't know much about any alleged fraud/relationship issues, but will Google it.

 

I don't think for a minute that he was in cahoots with Corbyn. I'd imagine he had a low opinion of Corbyn. He was a Tory, not a Labourite, after all, never mind being chummy with the Hard Left.

I imagine that he was personally opposed to Brexit (I know his wife - a Labourite - was) - and everyone, even a neutral official, will have their own opinions. But my view is that his actions on Brexit were motivated by a desire to protect legislative power against the abuse of executive power.....while boosting his own massive ego, of course. As with Matt, though, I'm sure we'll have to agree to disagree on some of that! 

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Don't sit on the fence, mate! 

 

I don't know much about any alleged fraud/relationship issues, but will Google it.

 

I don't think for a minute that he was in cahoots with Corbyn. I'd imagine he had a low opinion of Corbyn. He was a Tory, not a Labourite, after all, never mind being chummy with the Hard Left.

I imagine that he was personally opposed to Brexit (I know his wife - a Labourite - was) - and everyone, even a neutral official, will have their own opinions. But my view is that his actions on Brexit were motivated by a desire to protect legislative power against the abuse of executive power.....while boosting his own massive ego, of course. As with Matt, though, I'm sure we'll have to agree to disagree on some of that! 

You "imagine" he was personally opposed to Brexit?

 

Even if anyone out there hadn't worked it out whilst in the chair he wasn't shy about expressing his opinion about how bad it was just hours after he had finally left the chair.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/06/john-bercow-brexit-is-uks-biggest-mistake-since-second-world-war

 

He wasnt in cahoots with Bercow but he certainly was with Grieve - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6585329/Dominic-Grieve-secretly-met-John-Bercow-just-HOURS-Speaker-allowed-killer-amendment.html

 

I don't think anyone in politics would describe Bercow as a Tory anymore, despite what he was elected as.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

You "imagine" he was personally opposed to Brexit?

 

Even if anyone out there hadn't worked it out whilst in the chair he wasn't shy about expressing his opinion about how bad it was just hours after he had finally left the chair.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/06/john-bercow-brexit-is-uks-biggest-mistake-since-second-world-war

 

Any politician is entitled to hold a view on such an important issue. There are still a few in the cabinet who supported Remain, aren't there? Hancock? Morgan? I just looked at Lindsay Hoyle's voting record - although he's not voted on Brexit, due to his deputy speaker duties, he had previously mainly voted for more EU integration (e.g. Lisbon Treaty).

 

But just because someone holds an opinion, it doesn't mean they were deviously using their position to promote that cause: e.g. May had supported Remain but negotiated a Brexit deal, whatever we may think of it.

 

Bercow had a well-established reputation, long before Brexit, for seeking to protect our democratically-elected Parliament against an over-powerful executive, as he saw it. People are entitled to disagree with his stance or the way he went about "protecting Parliament" (as I know you do). Likewise, some people were fuming when the Supreme Court upheld Gina Miller's victory ensuring that Article 50 would be subject to a democratic vote, not ordered by royal prerogative - you were one of those fuming, I recall. Similarly, there was anger at the Supreme Court not allowing Johnson to suspend democracy. People are entitled to support more centralisation of power with govt & to disapprove of actions enhancing parliamentary democracy. I disagree with them.

 

1 hour ago, MattP said:

 

He wasnt in cahoots with Bercow but he certainly was with Grieve - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6585329/Dominic-Grieve-secretly-met-John-Bercow-just-HOURS-Speaker-allowed-killer-amendment.html

 

So, the Speaker of Parliament met with a Member of Parliament? Next thing you'll tell me that Brendan Rodgers has met members of the LCFC team? 

 

No, seriously, I'm sure he's met MPs with all sorts of views to explain/facilitate Commons business. He may even have met the Brexit-promoting PM. But it wasn't Bercow who passed Grieve's amendment - it was a democratic vote by our elected representatives

 

1 hour ago, MattP said:

 

I don't think anyone in politics would describe Bercow as a Tory anymore, despite what he was elected as.

 

There are lots of people who used to be described as Tories but wouldn't be any more: Clarke, Heseltine & Grieve, for starters, maybe even Major.

 

The Tory party has fundamentally changed. For the better, I'm sure you'd say. I think you believe that it will shift left on economic policy and right on social policy. I'm not convinced you're right in the medium/long-term - about the economic policy, at least. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

[leicsmac]

6 hours ago, MattP said:

Stop being such a pansy and being so prissy. I laughed at the outrageousness of the story. You come across like a 12 year old schoolgirl at times.

 

 

Fair enough man, read way too much as punching down to me but whatever makes you laugh.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51170252

 

Hopefully we won't get another Charlottesville, one Heather Heyer incident was one too many. Reasonably good to see government apparatus are taking the far-right threat at least vaguely seriously though - despite the nudge-nudge-wink-wink approach from other parts of government.

[leicsmac]

https://nypost.com/2020/01/19/chaos-in-puerto-rico-as-mob-finds-unused-disaster-supplies/

 

...the hell?

[ozleicester]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

So, the Speaker of Parliament met with a Member of Parliament? Next thing you'll tell me that Brendan Rodgers has met members of the LCFC team

Not Ben and Hamza apparently

[ozleicester]

34 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Fair enough man, read way too much as punching down to me but whatever makes you laugh.

Pissing on the homeless is a start

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Pissing on the homeless is a start

I think that particular incident pretty much speaks for itself and there's not an awful lot of need to bring it up again and again, but that's me.

[MC Prussian]

23 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Laurence Fox is somewhat blinded by his privilege in that he'll never experience the world in a way that someone of a different race and sex will and that leaves it open to him not seeing discrimination in places where perhaps some exists.

 

That being said, Lily Allen can't really speak for those who might experience such discrimination either and she shouldn't try, it harms far more than it helps.

What privilege? Every single person experiences the world in a different manner from the get-go, that is a given. Everyone experiences hardships at one point or another. One could equally say that Boyle will never experience the world like Fox does.

Shami Chakrabarti is a duchess - talk about privilege. She then plays the "woman" card.  Being a PM candidate shouldn't be about gender or race, either. But all about competency.

Actors' union Equity then brandished Fox for his comments, calling them a "disgrace to the industry". Well, the irony. It's not as if acting is having a bad rep at present, anyway. It may used to be a more reputable profession, but today?

 

Does being "white" and "male" mean everything's rosy, everything served on a silver platter?

Where does this notion come from that men and white men in particular have it so much better? Life expectancy, suicide rates, violence, alimony rows, being discriminated against due to gender quotas - just to name a few where life fancies other groups.

But maybe us "white men" should start moaning like all other groups and talk about oppression and micro-aggressions also...

 

The argument shouldn't be about race or gender or general privilege. It should be around class, individual privilege, morale, character and personality - to put it bluntly: Either you're a dick, or you're not. No matter where you come from or what sex you have.

Edited 20 January 2020 by MC Prussian

[MC Prussian]

19 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

This is the bit that wound people up the most:

 

And then LILY ****ING ALLEN posted this on her instagram:

 

Lily Allen should stick to taking in refugees like she promised to as a very compassionate and privileged human being that she is (estimated net worth of around £15m in 2019):

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-37633937/lily-allen-i-would-take-in-a-refugee

 

Oh, she didn't. She did virtue-signal, though. How very brave of her.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-51168822

 

How very magnanimous - but then I guess there isn't really much more he can do.

 

 

[StanSP]

Just a tiny bit of snow and they all go crazy! 

 

[Innovindil]

51 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Just a tiny bit of snow and they all go crazy! 

 

And I was complaining about scraping a bit of frost off mine this morning. 

[Guest MattP]

18 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

Any politician is entitled to hold a view on such an important issue. There are still a few in the cabinet who supported Remain, aren't there? Hancock? Morgan? I just looked at Lindsay Hoyle's voting record - although he's not voted on Brexit, due to his deputy speaker duties, he had previously mainly voted for more EU integration (e.g. Lisbon Treaty).

 

But just because someone holds an opinion, it doesn't mean they were deviously using their position to promote that cause: e.g. May had supported Remain but negotiated a Brexit deal, whatever we may think of it.

 

Bercow had a well-established reputation, long before Brexit, for seeking to protect our democratically-elected Parliament against an over-powerful executive, as he saw it. People are entitled to disagree with his stance or the way he went about "protecting Parliament" (as I know you do). Likewise, some people were fuming when the Supreme Court upheld Gina Miller's victory ensuring that Article 50 would be subject to a democratic vote, not ordered by royal prerogative - you were one of those fuming, I recall. Similarly, there was anger at the Supreme Court not allowing Johnson to suspend democracy. People are entitled to support more centralisation of power with govt & to disapprove of actions enhancing parliamentary democracy. I disagree with them.

 

So, the Speaker of Parliament met with a Member of Parliament? Next thing you'll tell me that Brendan Rodgers has met members of the LCFC team? 

 

No, seriously, I'm sure he's met MPs with all sorts of views to explain/facilitate Commons business. He may even have met the Brexit-promoting PM. But it wasn't Bercow who passed Grieve's amendment - it was a democratic vote by our elected representatives.

 

There are lots of people who used to be described as Tories but wouldn't be any more: Clarke, Heseltine & Grieve, for starters, maybe even Major.

 

The Tory party has fundamentally changed. For the better, I'm sure you'd say. I think you believe that it will shift left on economic policy and right on social policy. I'm not convinced you're right in the medium/long-term - about the economic policy, at least. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

I wasnt saying Bercow isn't entitled to an opinion - I was bemused you only thought and didn't know what he thought of Brexit!

 

Anyway it's all worked out now and in hindsight I'm sure Bercow did far more good for Boris than he ever could have imagined last month. I'm still trying to work out what Corbyn is doing nominating him though, risking trolling if so.

 

Interesting the Times says he would actually be sitting as a Labour peer if his nomination was accepted as well under current convention?

[Guest MattP]

17 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Fair enough man, read way too much as punching down to me but whatever makes you laugh.

Nothing wrong with punching down - that's equality for you. Interestingly Ricky Gervais touched on that in his interview with Andrew Doyle (Titania McGrath) last month.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/12/comedy-in-the-era-of-twitter-outrage-an-interview-with-ricky-gervais/

 

The counter-argument to Ricky’s view that anything can be a subject for comedy is that a comic must always ‘punch up’, and that by joking about trans or race issues Ricky is taking aim at the marginalised. ‘There are lots of things wrong with that. Who decides what’s punching up and punching down? I have a routine [in his new stand-up tour, Supernature] about these comedians writing articles in the Guardian, trying to set the rules of comedy, insisting that we should never punch down. And I say sometimes you’ve got to punch down. Like if you’re beating up a disabled toddler.’

[oxford blue]

In 2018, Corbyn said future Labour peers would have to agree to abolishing the House of Lords:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/23/all-future-labour-peers-must-back-abolition-of-lords-says-corbyn

 

I wonder if his principles still demand this, or is he like other opportunist politicians?

 

It is now reported that the nomination may be blocked:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/20/no-10-hints-it-may-block-labour-bid-to-make-john-bercow-a-peer

[Carl the Llama]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

Nothing wrong with punching down - that's equality for you. Interestingly Ricky Gervais touched on that in his interview with Andrew Doyle (Titania McGrath) last month.

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/12/comedy-in-the-era-of-twitter-outrage-an-interview-with-ricky-gervais/

 

The counter-argument to Ricky’s view that anything can be a subject for comedy is that a comic must always ‘punch up’, and that by joking about trans or race issues Ricky is taking aim at the marginalised. ‘There are lots of things wrong with that. Who decides what’s punching up and punching down? I have a routine [in his new stand-up tour, Supernature] about these comedians writing articles in the Guardian, trying to set the rules of comedy, insisting that we should never punch down. And I say sometimes you’ve got to punch down. Like if you’re beating up a disabled toddler.’

I think the difference here is that one is telling jokes, the other is performing a physical act which is obviously inappropriate in a professional setting between two strangers. Comedic philosophies shouldn't even come into it.