General News Thread

[Stevosevic]

20 minutes ago, Samilktray said:

Please do, its good to hear differing views imho

More free housing and healthcare to people who should not be in this country? People who have entered illegally and no requirement to seek work to obtain the benefits? 

 

It’s outrageous. This is what they want genuine hard working people to pay for. 

Edited 27 February by Stevosevic

[leicsmac]

15 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

There are more to borders than just geographical boundaries.

 

Religion, values, culture, crime are all varying around the world.

 

A world without borders would be lawlessness. You need borders to keep out some aspects of the world you don’t want on your own door step. There is lots wrong with the world but opening up borders would be far from a resolution. Imagine how many more illegal immigrants (current definition) would be flocking to major nations like the UK if it was even easier. You need control. 
 

 

You're right in that there's far too many people who haven't gotten over the tribal mindset and the feeling of insularity (and sometimes superiority) that they have because of it. That's why a borderless world (or even one with simply less) wouldn't work at the present time. 

 

What a lot of folks seem to overlook, however, is that same mindset is totally incompatible with the challenges our species faces in the future, and that incompatibility will be punished, as it has with a lot of other species in the past. Darwin had it right; adapt, or die. 

 

Some people aren't arguing for greater cooperation and openness and a change in mentality because "it's the right thing to do". They're arguing for it because it's the only possible way forward that might (just might) not end up in catastrophe for all of us, and a lot of other species besides. 

 

9 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

Taken to the extreme no borders or walls or fences at home. Conflict arises without borders anyway. 

I can understand the need for marking and bordering of territory at both the individual and the species level. However, everything in between... see above. 

Edited 27 February by leicsmac

[kenny]

11 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

Taken to the extreme no borders or walls or fences at home. Conflict arises without borders anyway. 

If we had no borders I would invest every penny I had into private security and security fencing firms.

 

 

[CornwallFox]

8 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

More free housing and healthcare to people who should not be in this country? People who have entered illegally and no requirement to seek work to obtain the benefits? 

 

It’s outrageous. This is what they want genuine hard working people to pay for. 

Can we just unpack this. 

 

Asylum seekers are housed minimally (even where hotels are used they don't get access to normal hotel services, food etc).

 

They don't get benefits, they get a small amount of money, much less than benefits, to survive with. 

 

They get healthcare like everybody else, you surely don't think we should let them die?

 

They are not allowed to work. Other countries allow asylum seekers to work so that they are able to contribute towards their own costs. Would you agree that would be a sensible change?

 

In reality asylum seekers come from a while variety of backgrounds and would inevitably have skills that could be useful. Let them work to offset costs and suddenly it doesn't seem so bad.

 

 

[CornwallFox]

33 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

 Large part of the campaign was done with Pakistan flags being displayed throughout Gorton. That’s why I used that country.

 

As I say, I live in Manchester, I go through Gorton daily, I am very close to this and what I saw in the whipping up of support.

 

Thankfully this isn’t the seat I live in. 

So part of the campaign meant politicical parties trying to gain support by talking about the interests of the local people and through displays of national pride? 

 

How does that differ from reform and the endless ropey looking English flags flying everywhere? 

[leicsmac]

11 minutes ago, kenny said:

If we had no borders I would invest every penny I had into private security and security fencing firms.

 

 

A very logical response at the present time. 

 

But, again, see above. 

[Stevosevic]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

You're right in that there's far too many people who haven't gotten over the tribal mindset and the feeling of insularity (and sometimes superiority) that they have because of it. That's why a borderless world (or even one with simply less) wouldn't work at the present time. 

 

What a lot of folks seem to overlook, however, is that same mindset is totally incompatible with the challenges our species faces in the future, and that incompatibility will be punished, as it has with a lot of other species in the past.

 

Some people aren't arguing for greater cooperation and openness and a change in mentality because "it's the right thing to do". They're arguing for it because it's the only possible way forward that might (just might) not end up in catastrophe for all of us, and a lot of other species besides. 

 

I can understand the need for marking and bordering of territory at both the individual and the species level. However, everything in between... see above. 

Let me guess, it’s only European countries that are the “tribal” ones? 
 

There are a lot of proud nations around the world. Proud of who they are, their history etc… I don’t think open borders would be a strong global move or seen as a positive.

 

 

[Stevosevic]

16 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

So part of the campaign meant politicical parties trying to gain support by talking about the interests of the local people and through displays of national pride? 

 

How does that differ from reform and the endless ropey looking English flags flying everywhere? 

You’ve used national pride and then regarded the England flag as ropey. Bit contradictory. You can’t be ok with one but not the other? 
 

 

[leicsmac]

Just now, Stevosevic said:

Let me guess, it’s only European countries that are the “tribal” ones? 
 

There are a lot of proud nations around the world. Proud of who they are, their history etc… I don’t think open borders would be a strong global move or seen as a positive.

 

 

No, it's everyone. All "tribes" have that in their history, and sometimes that makes me wonder why exactly they're so proud of it. 

 

But in any case, this in no way invalidates the point made that our species, as a whole, has to change its mentality about such things or it will not meet the challenges ahead. And that won't end well. 

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, OntarioFox said:

Gonna start posting her in the matchday thread instead of the countdown lady, let's leave it at that 

As my gran used to say ‘there’s a lid for every pot’.

(she never said that btw) 

if you’re not in a significant minority then I’m worried

 

50 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

 

I know nothing of Gorton but what are you actually saying? What is so troubling to you about this and the repercussions of the greens being in charge?

 

People’s politics are their own business.  It should be fine to say that you disagree with a party and not be required to justify it.  Some of the green’s headline policy statements simply don’t align with the Muslim continuity. if Palestine wasn't the open sore it currently is, I don’t believe that the Muslim vote would be headed there. I think the youth vote is really interesting - be good to see some breakdown of the demographics within the turnout. 

[danny.]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

As my gran used to say ‘there’s a lid for every pot’.

(she never said that btw) 

if you’re not in a significant minority then I’m worried

 

People’s politics are their own business.  It should be fine to say that you disagree with a party and not be required to justify it.  Some of the green’s headline policy statements simply don’t align with the Muslim continuity. if Palestine wasn't the open sore it currently is, I don’t believe that the Muslim vote would be headed there. I think the youth vote is really interesting - be good to see some breakdown of the demographics within the turnout. 

The Islam/left love in is a genuine source of bemusement for me. I saw a video the other day with a Green Party trans-woman activist asking Mothin Ali his views on LGBT and trans etc and it was painful watching him spend three minutes saying everything but what he wanted to say. Plus movements like Queers for Palestine etc. Good for Islam, but the levels of cognitive dissonance from the left are wild.

[StanSP]

1 hour ago, Stevosevic said:

 Large part of the campaign was done with Pakistan flags being displayed throughout Gorton. That’s why I used that country.

 

As I say, I live in Manchester, I go through Gorton daily, I am very close to this and what I saw in the whipping up of support.

 

Thankfully this isn’t the seat I live in. 

Is it any different to Reform whipping up support on the other side, so to speak? Capitalising on disadvantaged people and making them think one culture is the problem when in fact the issues are far wider and deeper? 

[CornwallFox]

27 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

You’ve used national pride and then regarded the England flag as ropey. Bit contradictory. You can’t be ok with one but not the other? 
 

 

I'm not okay with one and not the other. 

 

Most the England flags that have gone up are cheap Chinese crap that looks ropey AF.

 

These are separate things.

[CornwallFox]

15 minutes ago, danny. said:

The Islam/left love in is a genuine source of bemusement for me. I saw a video the other day with a Green Party trans-woman activist asking Mothin Ali his views on LGBT and trans etc and it was painful watching him spend three minutes saying everything but what he wanted to say. Plus movements like Queers for Palestine etc. Good for Islam, but the levels of cognitive dissonance from the left are wild.

I can't speak for the whole left, but I think generally we don't particularly love our not live Islam, we just think everybody should be cared about. 

 

Tbh the activism around trans, LGBTQ, specific ethnicities etc is just that, activism by particularly interested people, it's not the whole left. I'm not a fan of this lumping the left together then pointing at the fringe activists.

 

Now I realise you might come back to day I do the same with the right. Perhaps I do, I'll give some thought to that. But reform as a movement tends to be behind the things I rail about, rather than fringe groups. That's my excuse anyway 😁

[Stevosevic]

47 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Can we just unpack this. 

 

Asylum seekers are housed minimally (even where hotels are used they don't get access to normal hotel services, food etc).

 

They don't get benefits, they get a small amount of money, much less than benefits, to survive with. 

 

They get healthcare like everybody else, you surely don't think we should let them die?

 

They are not allowed to work. Other countries allow asylum seekers to work so that they are able to contribute towards their own costs. Would you agree that would be a sensible change?

 

In reality asylum seekers come from a while variety of backgrounds and would inevitably have skills that could be useful. Let them work to offset costs and suddenly it doesn't seem so bad.

 

 

You realise most of the people coming in aren’t really asylum seekers? They’re coming for a free ride regardless of how little the amounts are. It’s better than what they have currently. If you turn off the tap then they stop coming - it’s really that simple. Some countries have a hard stance on this and we should do to.

 

If I travel to a country and outstay my welcome - I am rightly removed and I certainly can’t start claiming benefits (regardless of amount)

 

How some are so open to housing people who are here illegally and as a priority over natives is terrifying. If you want to move to any country in the world - do it the right way.

[CrazyKopCorner]

4 hours ago, Brizzle Fox said:

Labour will sort their act out before the next general election, so although a bad night for then (and they'll have a few more before things get better) not the end of the world.

 

Genuinely think though this is worse for Reform and shows a trend following both  the by elections we had in Scotland and Wales recently.

 

They seem to have a strong core vote but it has quite a low ceiling,  and the disproportionate amount of publicity they get on the TV and in the written press, can be detrimental rather than beneficial to them, as more people get exposed to their rhetoric. Another example last night being the totally ungracious response to losing by Goodwin.

 

For so many people it will be "anyone but Reform" at the next GE, and I think that proportion of people will only increase as time goes by.

FM when have Labour EVER sorted their act out? 

 

This spells absolute curtains for them It just depends if that idiot of a Prime Minister totally takes the party down with him 

[Stevosevic]

25 minutes ago, danny. said:

The Islam/left love in is a genuine source of bemusement for me. I saw a video the other day with a Green Party trans-woman activist asking Mothin Ali his views on LGBT and trans etc and it was painful watching him spend three minutes saying everything but what he wanted to say. Plus movements like Queers for Palestine etc. Good for Islam, but the levels of cognitive dissonance from the left are wild.

You are right to be bemused by a population supporting a demographic that probably disagrees with their lifestyle more than anyone. 
 

They’ll take the vote until they don’t need the numbers anymore 

[CornwallFox]

2 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

You realise most of the people coming in aren’t really asylum seekers? They’re coming for a free ride regardless of how little the amounts are. It’s better than what they have currently. If you turn off the tap then they stop coming - it’s really that simple. Some countries have a hard stance on this and we should do to.

 

If I travel to a country and outstay my welcome - I am rightly removed and I certainly can’t start claiming benefits (regardless of amount)

 

How some are so open to housing people who are here illegally and as a priority over natives is terrifying. If you want to move to any country in the world - do it the right way.

They aren't here illegally, no matter how many times you say it. The supreme court has confirmed that position. Until their asylum claims are processed they are here. If they are not granted asylum and fail any appeals then they can be removed.

 

The issue is that the Tories intentionally stopped processing claims, leading to a huge backlog of people then being put into hotels etc. Your ire should be directed at a party intentionally causing a problem they thought would help them electorally. 

 

The current government has started making progress on the backlog, has overseen record numbers leaving, and it's trying to cut the costs off accommodation - though that is difficult as jenrick signed contracts with hotels until 2029. If you don't like the costs off asylum seekers then you should be supportive of these things. 

 

No matter what % are granted or not granted asylum in the end, while they are claiming asylum they are allowed to be here so allowing them to work would allow us to offset the cost, and potentially give them a route to show they are productive members of society, again something you should support if cost and fairness are your key concerns.

[danny.]

5 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

I can't speak for the whole left, but I think generally we don't particularly love our not live Islam, we just think everybody should be cared about. 

 

Tbh the activism around trans, LGBTQ, specific ethnicities etc is just that, activism by particularly interested people, it's not the whole left. I'm not a fan of this lumping the left together then pointing at the fringe activists.

 

Now I realise you might come back to day I do the same with the right. Perhaps I do, I'll give some thought to that. But reform as a movement tends to be behind the things I rail about, rather than fringe groups. That's my excuse anyway 😁

No I wouldn't come back with that. Although a source of humour on this forum, I'm not actually on the right (cue laughing emojis). I don't like Reform at all and the Tories have destroyed this country, but to those on the left I am right, and to the right I am left, the joys of centrism.

Let me rephrase then, "left wing parties". There is demonstrative connection between both Labour and the Green Party with Islam, and they enjoy the Muslim vote when there isn't a specific independant Islamist candidate in an area, which is extremely powerful as it's coordinated and focused, with a much higher turnout percentage than non-Muslim.

[CornwallFox]

1 minute ago, danny. said:

No I wouldn't come back with that. Although a source of humour on this forum, I'm not actually on the right (cue laughing emojis). I don't like Reform at all and the Tories have destroyed this country, but to those on the left I am right, and to the right I am left, the joys of centrism.

Let me rephrase then, "left wing parties". There is demonstrative connection between both Labour and the Green Party with Islam, and they enjoy the Muslim vote when there isn't a specific independant Islamist candidate in an area, which is extremely powerful as it's coordinated and focused, with a much higher turnout percentage than non-Muslim.

It's not for me to determine where you sit politically though I would suggest right of lib dem and left of current Tories would maybe a soft traditional centre right Tory land? 

 

It's definitely true left wing parties get more votes from all former immigrant communities generally. Might that be more to do with the historic wrongs of right wing parties, and the general anti immigrant mindset of a big part of the right wing electorate? Left wing policies tend to aim to treat everybody more fairly, whereas right wing policies tend to aim to penalise. Maybe I'm wrong with that but I don't really see a love in particularly.

[danny.]

4 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

I think the question on everyone's lips is, Hannah Spencer - would you?

Nice bit of objectification and casual misogyny to start a Friday...
 

3 hours ago, Sampson said:

Disagree with this. I think our FPTP system designed for a 2 party system which has split to a 5 party system in England means it’s more likely that a party gets a majority and therefore 100% of the power with 22% of the votes and more likely a “protest party” gets 100% of the power power. 
 

A 5-way split actually means winning by 3% of the total votes means you’re more likely to get a majority than a 3-way split 

Careful chap, you've just agreed with one of my posts!
 

1 hour ago, David Guiza II said:

Would it be more or less troubling if Matt Goodwin, who seemed to see the Handmaid's Tale as guidebook were to have won the election? 

 

Where I live is dominated by posh, white, Tories and the local MP makes no effort whatsoever to appeal to anybody but that demographic. Is that OK?

The Handmaid's tale certainly does remind me of one demographic...

[Lionator]

36 minutes ago, danny. said:

The Islam/left love in is a genuine source of bemusement for me. I saw a video the other day with a Green Party trans-woman activist asking Mothin Ali his views on LGBT and trans etc and it was painful watching him spend three minutes saying everything but what he wanted to say. Plus movements like Queers for Palestine etc. Good for Islam, but the levels of cognitive dissonance from the left are wild.

I think only an idiot would argue that there’s a mutual crossover but ultimately it doesn’t have to be that everyone is pulling in the same direction on these issues. Why does a gay person not want homophobes droning G*sans to death, it’s because we would rather people to be alive to change and evolve. What do any of the other parties have to offer immigrants other than using them as a political tool???

Edited 27 February by Lionator

[StanSP]

9 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

You are right to be bemused by a population supporting a demographic that probably disagrees with their lifestyle more than anyone. 

You make it sound like we've all had the same experience. 

 

I've come across loads of people of the demographic you've collectively all piled into one. But my experience is different. 

 

I've not come across a Muslim person who disagrees with the general lifestyle here. I don't see them complaining about people drinking, eating pork or bacon, not fasting during Ramadan, embracing Christmas and Easter and other holidays celebrated here. 

 

 

[danny.]

1 minute ago, CornwallFox said:

It's not for me to determine where you sit politically though I would suggest right of lib dem and left of current Tories would maybe a soft traditional centre right Tory land? 

 

It's definitely true left wing parties get more votes from all former immigrant communities generally. Might that be more to do with the historic wrongs of right wing parties, and the general anti immigrant mindset of a big part of the right wing electorate? Left wing policies tend to aim to treat everybody more fairly, whereas right wing policies tend to aim to penalise. Maybe I'm wrong with that but I don't really see a love in particularly.

I'm not right of Lib dem, though. Although they have had my vote every time bar a few forays into Green and Labour (Corbyn era, anyway). It's very tricky to define the political spectrum as everyone has their own definition of it now, and - as I say - the observer's own position adds a lot of bias to that.

Yea I think you have that pretty wrong IMHO, as an ideology, Islam is hard-right, so alliance with the left makes little sense. For example its views on women, LGBT, trans etc are in line with extreme- right Christian conservative in the US, Westboro Baptist Church territory. 

[Lionator]

The other option is of course, just banning left wing parties. And in general banning immigrants from voting. And why not include all disillusioned under 40 year olds too?? That way the successful gravy train can keep on rolling.