General News Thread

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

The truth shall make ye fret - Ankh-Morpork Times.

 

But for me, two telling quotes are...

 

A lie will travel halfway round the world before the truth has even got its shoes on.

 

What is truth?

 

The later one pointing out that most people have their own personal truth, not based on anything other than belief and perception. Both of which can be wrong.

Right.

 

The only thing I'll add to this is that we do have empiricism and the rest of the scientific method as a means of establishing truth (or fact, if you like) in spite of whatever personal belief or perception an individual might have. And that's important. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

57 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Right.

 

The only thing I'll add to this is that we do have empiricism and the rest of the scientific method as a means of establishing truth (or fact, if you like) in spite of whatever personal belief or perception an individual might have. And that's important. 

TBH, the scientific community can be just as guilty of personal truths, especially if they are working for a company or government that expects certain results.

 

Modestly I'd also add that historically scientists have believed they had an understanding of a subject only for someone to come along and change that understanding.

1000 years from now, who knows. I often think that Sci-fi movies are very limited in their visions of the future.

[ajthefox]

25 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

TBH, the scientific community can be just as guilty of personal truths, especially if they are working for a company or government that expects certain results.

 

Modestly I'd also add that historically scientists have believed they had an understanding of a subject only for someone to come along and change that understanding.

1000 years from now, who knows. I often think that Sci-fi movies are very limited in their visions of the future.

Yes, that is more or less how science always has and always will work. Some things are absolute and some are hypotheses that are then subject to change over time. It doesn't make science a subjective thing, just one that is evolving. 

[ClaphamFox]

This is quite good on why current Labour policies may deliver us a Reform government (or at least a Reform-led government) in the next election:

https://www.ft.com/content/1052957c-90ef-4e00-b599-e45643c5c8e4

 

[Dahnsouff]

4 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

TBH, the scientific community can be just as guilty of personal truths, especially if they are working for a company or government that expects certain results.

 

Modestly I'd also add that historically scientists have believed they had an understanding of a subject only for someone to come along and change that understanding.

1000 years from now, who knows. I often think that Sci-fi movies are very limited in their visions of the future.

Personal truths with scrutiny just becomes truth though.

[leicsmac]

43 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

This is quite good on why current Labour policies may deliver us a Reform government (or at least a Reform-led government) in the next election:

https://www.ft.com/content/1052957c-90ef-4e00-b599-e45643c5c8e4

 

 

 

On 27/11/2025 at 07:24, leicsmac said:

 

"But, but, the other guys were doing bad things, I didn't have any choice but to vote for these guys who are doing worse things to vulnerable people... it's not my fault..."

 

Yes. Yes it is. People should at least have the basic honesty of purpose to admit their own self interest about that. 

Enough abdication of responsibility, even when dressed up in 1000 well-chosen words. 

[danny.]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Enough abdication of responsibility, even when dressed up in 1000 well-chosen words. 

How was that your takeaway from the article?

[leicsmac]

4 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

TBH, the scientific community can be just as guilty of personal truths, especially if they are working for a company or government that expects certain results.

 

Modestly I'd also add that historically scientists have believed they had an understanding of a subject only for someone to come along and change that understanding.

1000 years from now, who knows. I often think that Sci-fi movies are very limited in their visions of the future.

To add to the salient points already given above, the scientific method is both self-correcting and the most accurate and effective method we have of parsing facts about our universe at the present time. 

 

So yes, point taken, but we still need that single point of truth for the sake of unity, and empiricism, while flawed, is likely the best shot we have.

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

 

 

Enough abdication of responsibility, even when dressed up in 1000 well-chosen words. 

I’m not sure that people who end up voting for Reform will frame the decision in their own minds in quite the way you describe. That reads more like a projection. As the article says, the problem is the number of people who have lost so much faith in the mainstream parties that they genuinely believe that voting for a batshit party led by a con man offering economically nonsensical policies will deliver a better outcome for them. They are wrong to believe that, of course, but I don’t think their anxiety about the future can be dismissed as mere ‘abdication of responsibility’.

[Robo61]

30 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

I’m not sure that people who end up voting for Reform will frame the decision in their own minds in quite the way you describe. That reads more like a projection. As the article says, the problem is the number of people who have lost so much faith in the mainstream parties that they genuinely believe that voting for a batshit party led by a con man offering economically nonsensical policies will deliver a better outcome for them. They are wrong to believe that, of course, but I don’t think their anxiety about the future can be dismissed as mere ‘abdication of responsibility’.

Given that the vast majority of those voting reform voted brexit,  blaming the current mailaise of the country on the current government is absolutely an abdication of resposnsibility.

[leicsmac]

48 minutes ago, danny. said:

How was that your takeaway from the article?

Because I've read a thousand like it and a thousand Internet comments, all looking to set things up to place the blame for all the appalling consequences of a Reform government on Labour and nowhere else, including where it should be. 

 

40 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

I’m not sure that people who end up voting for Reform will frame the decision in their own minds in quite the way you describe. That reads more like a projection. As the article says, the problem is the number of people who have lost so much faith in the mainstream parties that they genuinely believe that voting for a batshit party led by a con man offering economically nonsensical policies will deliver a better outcome for them. They are wrong to believe that, of course, but I don’t think their anxiety about the future can be dismissed as mere ‘abdication of responsibility’.

It's an argument I've heard quite a few times before, as well. 

 

I have sympathy for it, because these people clearly think they're stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea, but that doesn't absolve them of responsibility for the consequences of their voting action. 

 

Yes, when change is this drastic, the status quo usually did something to bring it there, and should it happen, Labour should accept their failure of execution, communication, or both. But that doesn't mean that either the voters or the winning party then get a free ride in terms of responsibility for what they then do. 

 

I've really had issue with this argument ever since 2016/17 because it was used then to deflect from the worst excesses of the US administration at that time and since, and IMO it enabled them. The same ideas are taking root in the UK.

 

NB. These folks have every reason to be anxious about the future. However, I fear that the specific reasons for their anxiety about it are not the most accurate or pertinent ones.

 

Edit: and should the worst consequences of the ideology that Reform embody come to pass, those who are left certainly aren't going to be choosy about who they blame for the hellworld we left for them. 

Edited 4 December 2025 by leicsmac

[danny.]

Just now, leicsmac said:

Because I've read a thousand like it and a thousand Internet comments, all looking to set things up to place the blame for all the appalling consequences of a Reform government on Labour and nowhere else, including where it should be. 

You didn't read it, did you?

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, danny. said:

You didn't read it, did you?

I did, and ClaphamFox makes the key point of the article clear in the post above, for anyone lacking the means to get over a paywall. 

 

If there's another point to be made here, I'd be happy to hear it. 

Edited 4 December 2025 by leicsmac

[danny.]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I did, and ClaphamFox makes the key point of the article clear in the post above, for anyone lacking the means to get over a paywall. 

 

If there's another point to be made here, I'd be happy to hear it. 

I thought it was a pretty balanced article with some good points, but I guess you are going to get different outtakes on articles depending on if you're left, centre, right etc.

 

[Dahnsouff]

Would not say it was especially biased either way, nor especially insightful, as it just yet again portrayed the malaise and negativity that is evident and seemingly expected in these times,

[leicsmac]

11 minutes ago, danny. said:

I thought it was a pretty balanced article with some good points, but I guess you are going to get different outtakes on articles depending on if you're left, centre, right etc.

 

 

4 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Would not say it was especially biased either way, nor especially insightful, as it just yet again portrayed the malaise and negativity that is evident and seemingly expected in these times,

It certainly wasn't biased from the point of view of stanning for Reform, but as Dahnsouff has said here, it wasn't insightful either, just speaking a refrain heard too many times before and one that IMO is a bit tiresome. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

To add to the salient points already given above, the scientific method is both self-correcting and the most accurate and effective method we have of parsing facts about our universe at the present time. 

 

So yes, point taken, but we still need that single point of truth for the sake of unity, and empiricism, while flawed, is likely the best shot we have.

I'm not talking about the scientific method, that's bulletproof. I'm talking about scientists, who are human and prone to mistakes, pride, greed, etc.

 

I wouldn't say that for every Bohr there's a Mengeles, but there still whackpot scientists about. Hence scientists are not an absolute truth and they are the presenters of science to the common people.

 

Which is why personal truths, even with science.

[ClaphamFox]

48 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

Given that the vast majority of those voting reform voted brexit,  blaming the current mailaise of the country on the current government is absolutely an abdication of resposnsibility.

But the article very clearly does not say that. It quite literally says, “Keir Starmer did not create this problem.” How on earth did you reach this conclusion?

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

I'm not talking about the scientific method, that's bulletproof. I'm talking about scientists, who are human and prone to mistakes, pride, greed, etc.

 

I wouldn't say that for every Bohr there's a Mengeles, but there still whackpot scientists about. Hence scientists are not an absolute truth and they are the presenters of science to the common people.

 

Which is why personal truths, even with science.

Fair point, and that's why the method has to see off the mavericks, and, more importantly, have good communicators to let people know why they need to be seen off.

[Dahnsouff]

6 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

I'm not talking about the scientific method, that's bulletproof. I'm talking about scientists, who are human and prone to mistakes, pride, greed, etc.

 

I wouldn't say that for every Bohr there's a Mengeles, but there still whackpot scientists about. Hence scientists are not an absolute truth and they are the presenters of science to the common people.

 

Which is why personal truths, even with science.

Scientists are in a privileged position, and like many who are at the upper end of their fields, they can suffer from hubris. Scientists have a far larger problem in my opinion. They are useless at communication, or at least at communication with regard to contemporary society, at the way to bridge the gap between their science and the public consciousness.

[leicsmac]

22 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Scientists are in a privileged position, and like many who are at the upper end of their fields, they can suffer from hubris. Scientists have a far larger problem in my opinion. They are useless at communication, or at least at communication with regard to contemporary society, at the way to bridge the gap between their science and the public consciousness.

Or, at least, there aren't enough of them good enough at such communication. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

2 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

Scientists are in a privileged position, and like many who are at the upper end of their fields, they can suffer from hubris. Scientists have a far larger problem in my opinion. They are useless at communication, or at least at communication with regard to contemporary society, at the way to bridge the gap between their science and the public consciousness.

Yeah, it can be very difficult to convey complex ideas to the average (and remember, by definition at least half the world is below average) person (which has just made me chuckle, the idea that there must be 1 person on the Earth who actually is average Jo(e) ).

 

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c04vdengk3do

 

President Donald Trump's administration has warned that Europe faces "civilisational erasure" and questioned whether certain nations can remain reliable allies, in a new strategy document that puts a particular focus on the continent.

The 33-page National Security Strategy sees the US leader outline his vision for the world and how he will wield US military and economic power to work towards it.

Trump described the document as a "roadmap" to ensure America remains "the greatest and most successful nation in human history".

European politicians have begun to react, with Germany's Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul saying his country did not need "outside advice".

 

Your Project 2025, demographic supremacist idea of "civilisation" is a ridiculous throwback and an insult to the proper meaning of the word, Mr Trump. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c04vdengk3do

 

President Donald Trump's administration has warned that Europe faces "civilisational erasure" and questioned whether certain nations can remain reliable allies, in a new strategy document that puts a particular focus on the continent.

The 33-page National Security Strategy sees the US leader outline his vision for the world and how he will wield US military and economic power to work towards it.

Trump described the document as a "roadmap" to ensure America remains "the greatest and most successful nation in human history".

European politicians have begun to react, with Germany's Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul saying his country did not need "outside advice".

 

Your Project 2025, demographic supremacist idea of "civilisation" is a ridiculous throwback and an insult to the proper meaning of the word, Mr Trump. 

Wow, just wow!

 

But I for one welcome our benevolent new overlord

[Md9]

So they have invented a fifa peace prize just for trump so he can claim he has won a peace prize?