General News Thread

[WigstonWanderer]

5 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Ok to give you the reasoning as to why I think Farage is way worse than any other option, which is what you asked for. 

 

I categorically disagree with you here. The civil service’s role is that it supposed to uphold the law and tell the government what they can and cannot do within the law, it is not supposed to serve the government - as you said, it should be impartial - that means being impartial against the government when the government is in conflict with the law. The civil service should be in conflict with the government and tell them what they can and can’t do by the letter of the law.

 

We live in a democracy. A democracy is not simply about voting, otherwise North Korea, Russia and Belarus would all be democracies - a democracy is a form of government where the ultimate power is in institutions not individuals - the government should categorically not be allowed to do just what they like - that’s called authoritarianism. 
 

The civil service is one of the 2 most important checks and balances in a democracy along with the legal system.

 

And this is exactly why populists go after both the civil service and the legal system as well as international institutions so they can dismantle democracy and institutions to give themselves power to do what they like - the populist playbook that Balsanaro and Erdogan popularised in 2014 that the likes of Trump and Farage both follow. This is why Trump goes after the legal system, the civil service and every international institution going - and Farage uses all the same language - this is why Farage’s #1 ambition is to leave the ECHR and ECJ because unlike the US we have supra-national institutions in Europe built after WW2 and designed to protect us from our own governments and the ECJ has already shown itself influential in Poland by stopping populist governments filling their Supreme Court with people who’ll just bend to their will (as Trump has successfully done).

 

I would also add that it’s also very telling that all these AI tech giants like Musk are also supporting these populist  parties like Reform and Trump or the AfD because they know that taking down the legal institutions and getting in the pockets of people who want more power will let them have the freedom to run riot with AI. And that’s way scarier and going to do way more damage to both our culture and job market than immigration ever will.

 

The law and civil service is there to protect us all as citizens. I understand people want to reduce immigration and don’t like cancel culture - but I really don’t think gutting the institutions that hold up democracy and giving the government the power to do what they like and gutting the civil service and legal systems which protect us is worth the trade off to do that - with the added bonus of all these foreign AI and social media tech bros also bring allowed to do what they like to our culture and job market, not by 100 fold.

 

That is my main argument as to why Farage is so much a worse option  than the others. I don’t think you genuinely want to live in a country where the civil service, legal systems and international institutions are subservient to the government., that is how it works in Russia and this is exactly how we end up with a system where we have no protections to standing against some nutjob in charge

 

Look I was always told this - think about the systems you’re creating with the worst possible leader in charge of them. if you hate Corbyn and Sultana for example- then think about them in power with this kind of state you want to create with a gutted legal system and civil service and where we’ve got no supra-national protections from the ECHR or ECJ.

[CornwallFox]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

Ok to give you the reasoning as to why I think Farage is way worse than any other option, which is what you asked for. 

 

I categorically disagree with you here. The civil service’s role is that it supposed to uphold the law and tell the government what they can and cannot do within the law, it is not supposed to serve the government - as you said, it should be impartial - that means being impartial against the government when the government is in conflict with the law. The civil service should be in conflict with the government and tell them what they can and can’t do by the letter of the law.

 

We live in a democracy. A democracy is not simply about voting, otherwise North Korea, Russia and Belarus would all be democracies - a democracy is a form of government where the ultimate power is in institutions not individuals - the government should categorically not be allowed to do just what they like - that’s called authoritarianism. 
 

The civil service is one of the 2 most important checks and balances in a democracy along with the legal system.

 

And this is exactly why populists go after both the civil service and the legal system as well as international institutions so they can dismantle democracy and institutions to give themselves power to do what they like - the populist playbook that Balsanaro and Erdogan popularised in 2014 that the likes of Trump and Farage both follow. This is why Trump goes after the legal system, the civil service and every international institution going - and Farage uses all the same language - this is why Farage’s #1 ambition is to leave the ECHR and ECJ because unlike the US we have supra-national institutions in Europe built after WW2 and designed to protect us from our own governments and the ECJ has already shown itself influential in Poland by stopping populist governments filling their Supreme Court with people who’ll just bend to their will (as Trump has successfully done).

 

I would also add that it’s also very telling that all these foreign AI tech giants like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel are also supporting these populist  parties like Reform and Trump or the AfD because they know that taking down the legal institutions and getting in the pockets of people who want more power will let them have the freedom to run riot with AI. And that’s way scarier and going to do way more damage to both our culture and job market than immigration ever will.

 

The law and civil service is there to protect us all as citizens. I understand people want to reduce immigration and don’t like cancel culture - but I really don’t think gutting the institutions that hold up democracy and giving the government the power to do what they like and gutting the civil service and legal systems which protect us is worth the trade off to do that - with the added bonus of all these foreign AI and social media tech bros also bring allowed to do what they like to our culture and job market, not by 100 fold.

 

That is my main argument as to why Farage is so much a worse option  than the others. I don’t think you genuinely want to live in a country where the civil service, legal systems and international institutions are subservient to the government., that is how it works in Russia and this is exactly how we end up with a system where we have no protections to standing against some nutjob in charge

 

Look I was always told this - think about the systems you’re creating with the worst possible leader you can personally imagine being in charge of them. if you hate Corbyn and Sultana for example- then think about them in power with this kind of state you want to create with a gutted legal system and civil service and where we’ve got no supra-national protections from the ECHR or ECJ and they’re essentially given free roles to do whatever they hell they like.

Honestly this deserves keeping for posterity. The single best explanation/argument/post I've seen on here.

[leicsmac]

9 hours ago, splinterdream said:

Obviously I wasn't looking for in depth policy by policy analysis, but that word salad says absolutely nothing, no offense.

We currently are living with one of the alternatives and everyday you think it can't get any worse, and it does, and the other alternatives are arguing for more extreme than this shower we have now. 

I guess it's all about what your vision of a better future is, how that can be achieved, and who is best to implement it, 

If that was believed vague, then answering it with what appears to be equal vagueness perhaps isn't the best way forward. 

 

No offence taken, but the laws of physics and their consequences are what they are, we can't hide from them and the only choice, politically or otherwise, is to take action against the incoming problems or not. Pretending that they don't exist won't end well for anyone. 

 

In any case, @Sampson makes a better argument upstream in why checks and balances in government policymaking are a good thing and why anyone wanting to get rid of them is not.

 

Edit: just noticed something, and I'm interested to know what kind of resident in the UK would use "offense" with the "s" rather than the "c".

Edited 16 January by leicsmac

[Lionator]

This fella is an absolute ghoul, basically in tears because Trump decided bombing Iran again might be silly. 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Lionator said:

This fella is an absolute ghoul, basically in tears because Trump decided bombing Iran again might be silly. 

He's sad that he's now likely going to miss some new "brown people suffering and dying" content for his spank bank. 

[Md9]

Doesn’t given this award to someone else make it void ? I’m sure I had seen that somewhere if true makes this even more stupid 

[CornwallFox]

4 minutes ago, Md9 said:

Doesn’t given this award to someone else make it void ? I’m sure I had seen that somewhere if true makes this even more stupid 

No it doesn't make it void. The medal is just a thing. She's still the winner of the peace prize. And no I'm not guessing, the nobel award people have already confirmed that.

 

Imagine what a ***** you'd have to be to accept it though, the bloke is a head case.

Edited 16 January by CornwallFox

[Md9]

4 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

No it doesn't make it void. The medal is just a thing. She's still the winner of the peace prize. And no I'm not guessing, the nobel award people have already confirmed that.

 

Imagine what a ***** you'd have to be to accept it though, the bloke is a head case.

He has been crying about it for years the absolute melon. Maybe he will shut up about it for a while until the next one is given out and he can get someone else to give him one so he can claim he got it 2 years in a row 

[Lionator]

10 minutes ago, Md9 said:

Doesn’t given this award to someone else make it void ? I’m sure I had seen that somewhere if true makes this even more stupid 

It’s funny as well because she thought Trump toppling Maduro would put her in power but he seems to have taken a liking to the old deputy president who very much represents the existing status quo 

[Lionator]

55 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

He's sad that he's now likely going to miss some new "brown people suffering and dying" content for his spank bank. 

Lindsey Graham I think may be the worst person in the world? He’s supposed to be a senator representing his constituents but seems to constantly tweeting and talking about bombing and regime change literally everywhere in the world. A proper unhinged weirdo. 

[Md9]

1 minute ago, Lionator said:

It’s funny as well because she thought Trump toppling Maduro would put her in power but he seems to have taken a liking to the old deputy president who very much represents the existing status quo 

So she will have lost her medal, everyone will thing she is a fool and she will be no better off for it. Not sure what she thought would happen from a deal with trump 😂

[Trav Le Bleu]

36 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

No it doesn't make it void. The medal is just a thing. She's still the winner of the peace prize. And no I'm not guessing, the nobel award people have already confirmed that.

 

Imagine what a ***** you'd have to be to accept it though, the bloke is a head case.

Oh, I'd go further. Would not surprise me if there was some behind the scenes, "give me the medal and I will help you," talk.

[Trav Le Bleu]

33 minutes ago, Md9 said:

He has been crying about it for years the absolute melon. Maybe he will shut up about it for a while until the next one is given out and he can get someone else to give him one so he can claim he got it 2 years in a row 

Do you think he'll wear the medal in bed?

[Thefox81]

13 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Do you think he'll wear the medal in bed?

100% he will. Thats a guarantee surely

Edited 16 January by Thefox81

[Md9]

23 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Do you think he'll wear the medal in bed?

He will never take it off again and if he does he will probably get milania to wear it for him 

[Mike Oxlong]

Norway should issue an ultimatum to the USA. Give us the medal back or we'll invade you 

[Lionator]

 

I think this guy inadvertently gives us good insight into the decline of this country. Essentially the ‘no other choice’ thing has been a thing since 2015 onwards. So in the 2019 it was “vote Boris, there’s no other choice”, 2024 “vote Labour, there’s no other choice”, now it’s “vote reform, there’s no other choice”.

 

I don’t really know what I’m trying to say but I feel it centre’s around the people being disengaged participants in the political process. Not realising that it’s people that create change. People feel powerless and just constantly chasing something different but equally something that feels safe to them. Can people elaborate? This disenfranchisement is so profound. 

[Sampson]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

 

I think this guy inadvertently gives us good insight into the decline of this country. Essentially the ‘no other choice’ thing has been a thing since 2015 onwards. So in the 2019 it was “vote Boris, there’s no other choice”, 2024 “vote Labour, there’s no other choice”, now it’s “vote reform, there’s no other choice”.

 

I don’t really know what I’m trying to say but I feel it centre’s around the people being disengaged participants in the political process. Not realising that it’s people that create change. People feel powerless and just constantly chasing something different but equally something that feels safe to them. Can people elaborate? This disenfranchisement is so profound. 

I think s a lot of these ideas are applied retroactively and weren’t really that way at the time

 

2015 - was more the collapse of the LibDems who were at a higher % of the vote than any party is polling now back in the 2005 and 2010 elections. Also nowadays, now we’ve seen longer term effects of austerity, Cameron and Osborne’s policies are derided; but that wasn’t the case in 2015. And their general argument was that they’d stopped the short term rot since the financial crisis (now we know the trade off wasn’t worth it but that wasn’t the mood back then).

 

2017 was May gambling she could get a majority on a message of strong leadership that massively backfired as she didn’t have the personality for that campaign. Corbyn’s ideas were also surprisingly popular with the voters. 
 

2019 was almost entirely a single issue election about Brexit. Corbyn went for a much much harder left campaign and tried to ignore the Brexit issue because everyone knew he wanted to leave when most of his voters didn’t.

 

2024 - Genuinely was a “we’re not the Tories” vote, but as many of us said at the time it was kind of a ridiculous campaign by Labour as their whole election campaign was “we won’t do this” and they completely backed themselves into a corner because it was obvious that the country needed mass changes and now if they do anything they just get a “turncoats, they said they wouldn’t raise taxes” stuff, when it was always obvious they needed to.

 

As for the general culture of apathy, I mean that has happened in every democracy, and social media, the internet and 24/7 new media is certainly.a major reason as we’re now seeing every single bad thing in the country and world which we never did before - the fact the murder rates in London going down the other day for example is ignored for example. Farage profits because he’s a ferociously unpatriotic person who more than anyone has spent the last 15 years telling everyone what a shithole and how horrendous Britain is while pointing to every little thing.

 

It’s literally the politics of exhaustion- Steve Bannon was very open about this 6 or 7 years ago - that it was an entirely planned strategy to flood the media with so much shit that people get exhausted by it and switch off and stop debating 

Edited 16 January by Sampson

[leicsmac]

Is it possible that this Greenland matter might incite enough Republican Congress members to grow a conscience (or just self-preservation) for impeachment proceedings to be viable?

[Mike Oxlong]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

 

I think this guy inadvertently gives us good insight into the decline of this country. Essentially the ‘no other choice’ thing has been a thing since 2015 onwards. So in the 2019 it was “vote Boris, there’s no other choice”, 2024 “vote Labour, there’s no other choice”, now it’s “vote reform, there’s no other choice”.

 

I don’t really know what I’m trying to say but I feel it centre’s around the people being disengaged participants in the political process. Not realising that it’s people that create change. People feel powerless and just constantly chasing something different but equally something that feels safe to them. Can people elaborate? This disenfranchisement is so profound. 

The worrying thing is that there are plenty of people who give a fvck about who Tom Skinner (or whoever their favourite "celebrity" is) will vote for 

[Spudulike]

This is latest of these cases. Must be costing a fortune in legal fees and wasting court time defending claims. NHS: Sort it out.

 

 

[Lionator]

24 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

This is latest of these cases. Must be costing a fortune in legal fees and wasting court time defending claims. NHS: Sort it out.

 

 

I mean it’s not really that much of a big deal but is a highly politicised thing which has little impact on people’s day to day lives. 

[leicsmac]

This person has (reasonably) high office in the most powerful nation in the world. 

[bovril]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

I mean it’s not really that much of a big deal but is a highly politicised thing which has little impact on people’s day to day lives. 

Stuff like men being able to use female changing rooms is probably a bigger deal for a lot of people than small fluctuations in GDP or employment rates because it is such a fundamental change to what people are used to. Economic problems you kind of come to expect and aren't as big a deal to a lot of people as some think. 

[leicsmac]

17 minutes ago, bovril said:

Stuff like men being able to use female changing rooms is probably a bigger deal for a lot of people than small fluctuations in GDP or employment rates because it is such a fundamental change to what people are used to. Economic problems you kind of come to expect and aren't as big a deal to a lot of people as some think. 

And that kind of cognitive dissonance between perception of importance and actual quantifiable importance in terms of effect is a pretty massive problem in the field of actually getting necessary stuff done right now imo.