Off Topic Politics Thread
- Thread starter ChilcoSaint
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I’m surprised Thatcher didn’t copy Churchill and use soldiers as well, to break up miners strikes.
Rumours were around that soldiers were deployed in police uniform, but I’m not sure if anything was proven.
She was considering the use of troops, apparently.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/03/margaret-thatcher-secret-plan-army-miners-strike
This argument is why you often need to separate Liberal vs Authoritarian and Socialist vs Capitalist from Left vs Right.
But this statement ignores that they are "co-incidentally" the most likely to religiously watch the news on the TV at 6pm or 10pm etc. So the "have no other way of refuting what is said" does not apply because while they read in the morning whatever their paper says they then get in their evening sit down to the news' constant refutation. "BBC reality check."
I disagree. The internet is what is giving these newspapers a voice. Their readerships are very low and most people would not read their stories if they weren't shared constantly (mostly by opposing viewpoints.)
Yes I am probably in the same generation that was brought up with a "daily newspaper" however newspaper's reach these days is much higher than it was when it was just a piece of paper. These days it is everywhere. Both left and right wing promoting what they agree and disagree with. The internet is used much more by left leaning folks though and it is they that are continuing the "influence" of what they call "right wing press" by continually sharing it around because they want their followers to jump up and down about what it says.
I don't agree at all about the face value comment. There is a "celebration" on right wing grass roots US based forums of the Trump campaign "using the tactics of the left against them" and while a lot of the stuff is not nice they are right. The fake news bit has been around for ages.
Take today for example where people's vote have taken down one of their videos. It focused on someone who was a leaver that had changed his mind.........problem being that Guido (nasty right wing Guido) investigated a bit and found out that this guy was vociferously remain pre and post the referendum. The guy was not a leaver. Fake news. Both sides are at this. Not a left or right thing but like the use of stats we have gone through today both sides can present the same data but using different criteria or timings and show "with facts" whatever supports their argument. And yes both sides can just make stuff up, like Ocasio Cortez with her Pentagon spending argument. I am not doing a "they are the liars" bit. Your "right wing diatribe" is actually a mirror of the other side as there is also a "left wing diatribe." There is not a lot of actual balanced stuff around anymore. Everything has become staunchly one sided including the TV, including the BBC as TV is for some reason assuming that they have to compete with the internet and TV news nowadays is not a lot more than twitter on a big screen.
Apart from the fact that not many had internet in 1997 let alone social media being a thing as behemoths like twitter and facebook I think you make a false correlation here.
Murdoch is not stupid but he did not win those elections. He backed a winner. He knew the Tories were done and switched, he didn't influence that switch. And when he knew Labour were done he switched again. He didn't win Cameron that "hung parliament." More like a musician that changes to a new style when they think their old style is about to go out of fashion.
Are Madonna and Kylie
masters at "re-inventing" themselves?............or do they just hear the new music and sell out each time becoming actors and bandwagon jumpers rather than innovators?I think people (on both sides of the argument) want to believe the other side is just following some "ultra powerful" person or group rather than admit that progress has been made, more people can see the wood for the trees than before and that more people are nicer and more educated than before.
And because there is nothing they can trust* to be truly unbiased then they retreat into their echo chamber.
*If the BBC actually refuted direct "because of Brexit" claims with valid information then people might trust them but they don't. They are pushing the "slow growth" because of Brexit mantra when everyone can see from any other source that the UK had better growth than the other G7 countries in the eurozone and when it is claimed that Brexit has held us back people will quite rightly say "but you told us that so much of our business was from Europe. How would we have achieved that extra 2% when the Eurozone has stalled?"
The vast amount of dishonesty has left people on all sides opposed because they can no longer trust anyone.
Last edited:
They are allowed, that is the point. It is the media and those who "influence" that have a faux outrage and it must be either/or.
Same with Gandhi and all others. None were angels, did some good, did a lot of bad. Each situation should be judged on its own merit rather than "X musician/actor just said something bad, erase his back catalogue."
This Churchill thing is symptomatic of where we have progressed to. Where awards ceremonies are no longer about rewarding the best and much more about the message the award will send. Where a musician can instantly go from "genius" to zero when something pops up from their past.............or equally still be e genius when it suits to ignore those "flaws."
Good point - If I did some of things George Michael did, I`d be called a dirty ba$tard. But he has iconic status now.
There are many examples. Not really just the Arts but anyone that is well known. Humans aren't perfect. Some worse than others yes but what we have now is people refusing to listen to their own brains. Their foot is tapping to a riff or piece of music but "that person did something bad so I must not like it, I refuse to like it."
Problem being they can refuse all they like but they do like it, they do appreciate it.
Similarly films. Did Kevin Spacey suddenly become a bad actor? Did his films suddenly become bad?
why is Kennedy so revered? Why are his flaws ignored? We have gone from selective overall to a zero tolerance yet some people have immunity.
I was once questioned on a music forum how I can like Rage against the Machine if I am a right winger. And I said to them. It is called music. I have no choice if I like music. You hear something and you just know straight away if you like it even before you hear any lyrics. And even then to me the lyrics are secondary, like another instrument. It's the tone, pitch, the rhythm of the voice. The lyrics mean little to me really otherwise why would anyone like "Smells like Teen spirit" or loads of other songs with meaningless lyrics?
What we are facing at the moment is a faux liberal movement that is trying to erase feelings or any kind of natural impulse. To make you feel guilty for being yourself.
In an age where we are increasingly introspective, self assessing and there is such a problem with mental illness I wonder if in the very near future people will end up driving themselves into depression through guilt because they like something that they have convinced themselves that they shouldn't. People hating themselves because they can't help being an individual?
People who liked the music of that band whose lead singer was a baby murdering *****! Did they suddenly not like the music when the news broke? Yes your mind "can" then bring up associations with the music and that can then mean you are put off things, but does that mean you don't like the music anymore?
I don't understand anyone who says they don't like music because of the artist. Like Oasis. Them being todgers doesn't make the music bad. Fine if you don't like the music but someone saying "I don't like Michael Jackson because he............" or "I don't like Oasis because they........." are lying to themselves.
I can just imagine an age where you become an outcast because you got caught tapping your foot to..........[insert]
Last edited:
Because it’s the only Brexit strategy that makes any sense at all?
If that’s the case we just as well not have had a referendum. Is that really the best compromise?
i do not think any kind of thought is genetic, its how the kid is bought up, 95% of British Muslims have children that identify as Muslim, 95% of Southampton fans have kids that are initially Saints fans until they decide that want to support Utd, kids want to please their parents so fall into line with their parents.
Black youth problems with the police is fairly new in England,past generations had a respect for the police, but todays youth, white and arab as well are now in a much more aggressive environment so they are more likely to exposed to police.
The growth of gangs, drugs and music making thug life look like a career move.
my mate was stationed out of Peckham, which was bad enough, then they disbanded the police station in the next borough and gave it to Peckham. Thankfully pistols are hard to get or the murder rate would go through the roof
There is a distinct difference between remaining in the Customs Union which we have because we are in the EU, and a separate Customs Union with the EU, such as Norway has. This means we would have a free trade agreement with the EU from March 30th, and thus avoid any danger of the backstop being triggered.
Chinese Vice Premier Hu Chunhua has cancelled trade talks with Britain’s finance minister Philip Hammond after defence secretary Gavin Williamson threatened to deploy a warship in the Pacific
