Off Topic Politics Thread

  • 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
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
ImpSaint said:
And there lies the problem. The (supposed to be) liberals are the ones preaching tolerance yet being intolerant
Click to expand...


Intolerant of fascism, yeah. You have to draw a line somewhere; Trump's overt misogyny and racism place him on the wrong side of the line, even without the endorsement of the KKK.

I learnt from my grandfather - a gentle, law abiding man who served his country in Flanders and later in the Home Guard - how to deal with fascists. He didn't tolerate Oswald Mosely's Black Shirts, he fought them on the streets of London. I'd do the same, and if Farage is serious about rounding up 10,000 thugs to march on the Supreme Court in December, I'll do as my grandad did and be there trying to stop him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian Thumwood, King Grimlock, SaintinSerbia and 2 others
ImpSaint said:
And there lies the problem. The (supposed to be) liberals are the ones preaching tolerance yet being intolerant
Click to expand...
Splitting semantic hairs isn't politics it's point scoring..
Within the politics my opinion is that which ever way you spin Trump and people, for whatever misguided reasons invest in him, he is in my view a psychopath, acting without conscience. As our Nobel Prize for Literature sang when I was a young adolescent... 'It's a hard rain...' there again it might just be Blowing in the Wind... Either way look out..
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImpSaint and Archers Road
Deliberately failing to parse words like "tolerance" is the favorite move of the alt-right set.

Apparently, because I am a liberal I have no rights to object to anything at all, or be deemed a hypocrite. While on their end, they can do whatever they want because they never claimed to be "tolerant."

So you get these Milo clones saying things like "It was easier for me to come out as gay than to tell everyone I am alt-right. That is so wrong! Leftists hypocrites blahblahblah!!!."

No, that is exactly the way it should be. You should be very thankful to society that the worst thing in your life is that people are strongly opposed to your political views.

Because being gay is not a choice, and it causes no harm to anyone. Being a racist IS a choice that causes great damage. People are judging you on your opinions. Maybe they could be nicer about it, whatever. Then don't hang out with them.

But to reach the absurd conclusion that calling someone a bigot is equal to or worse than actually being a bigot is a failure of your comprehension and internal logic, not mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schad, claytonsaint and SaintinSerbia
ImpSaint said:
Well we live in a world that talks of liberalism yet we have masses of rules and then rules to make sure we follow the rules then other rules from within society so that we have to follow the rules or we'll be told we're not following the rules.

Then we have this "Stop funding Hate" nonsense. Now I am not a Daily Mail reader and the times I have clicked on a link it takes me to a site full of celebs showing their skin or partying but to pressure corporations to starve a publication of advertising revenue is the contradiction of the age.

Liberalists are using social shaming tactics by getting rich celebs on board to pressure capitalist corporations to stop advertising in a publication because they don't like what that publication says. It is quite the opposite of liberalism. It is the opposite of the "freedom of speech" they so love.

We are less free than we ever were and are forced to conform as people.

And if you are a newspaper "don't write things we don't like or we'll try and close you down?"
Click to expand...
Why is it a contradition? Why should we allow newspapers to spew out hate? The answer is we shouldn't and they should be called out for it. The only way you stop newspapers spewing hate is hit them were it hurts and that is ad revenue. I have no problem with it.

Freedom of Speech does not include hate speech.
 
  • Like
Reactions: claytonsaint, Archers Road and SaintinSerbia
Archers Road said:
Intolerant of fascism, yeah. You have to draw a line somewhere; Trump's overt misogyny and racism place him on the wrong side of the line, even without the endorsement of the KKK.

I learnt from my grandfather - a gentle, law abiding man who served his country in Flanders and later in the Home Guard - how to deal with fascists. He didn't tolerate Oswald Mosely's Black Shirts, he fought them on the streets of London. I'd do the same, and if Farage is serious about rounding up 10,000 thugs to march on the Supreme Court in December, I'll do as my grandad did and be there trying to stop him.
Click to expand...
I'll be there with you mate.

¡No pasarán!
 
  • Like
Reactions: claytonsaint, tiggermaster, Archers Road and 2 others
Beefy said:
Why is it a contradition? Why should we allow newspapers to spew out hate? The answer is we shouldn't and they should be called out for it. The only way you stop newspapers spewing hate is hit them were it hurts and that is ad revenue. I have no problem with it.

Freedom of Speech does not include hate speech.
Click to expand...

So what about Yasmin Alibah Brown and Diane Abbott in their newspaper articles? Can only white people be bigots? Should these publications be targeted too because we don't want their brand of racism either?



How far down the line will this go? This is just another attempt to silence anyone with a view that is not liberal. First the Mail, then the Express and the Telegraph, then follow down the line and they'll take out the Spectator and on and on until they've achieved their aim. The Guardian will get off scot-free (although it might go bankrupt anyway.)

Being liberal does not mean attempting to stop other people's viewpoints no matter how disgusting they are. There are laws against hate speech. If you think the Mail is guilty then report them.
 
ImpSaint said:
So what about Yasmin Alibah Brown and Diane Abbott in their newspaper articles? Can only white people be bigots? Should these publications be targeted too because we don't want their brand of racism either?



How far down the line will this go? This is just another attempt to silence anyone with a view that is not liberal. First the Mail, then the Express and the Telegraph, then follow down the line and they'll take out the Spectator and on and on until they've achieved their aim. The Guardian will get off scot-free (although it might go bankrupt anyway.)

Being liberal does not mean attempting to stop other people's viewpoints no matter how disgusting they are. There are laws against hate speech. If you think the Mail is guilty then report them.
Click to expand...
Again hate speech shouldn't be tolerated at all and should be closed down.

Spewing hate about blacks, muslims, gays, transexuals, middle eastern people etc etc should not be simply seen as another persons view. It should be called out for what it is.

On papers I wouldn't care if it meantthey all were closed. They should not be able to incite or have clearly racist articles. Just look at what happened to Jo Cox? Then the papers print the disgusting "enemies of the people" crap. How the hell is that allowed?

I am sorry but I can't agree with your view at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archers Road, claytonsaint and ImpSaint
that Italy would grant Britain access to the EU’s single market “because you don’t want to lose prosecco exports”.

“He basically said: ‘I don’t want free movement of people but I want the single market,’” he told Bloomberg. “I said: ‘No way.’ He said: ‘You’ll sell less prosecco.’ I said: ‘OK, you’ll sell less fish and chips, but I’ll sell less prosecco to one country and you’ll sell less to 27 countries.’ Putting things on this level is a bit insulting.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...o-claim-brexit

Guy is a idiot
 
@MariaBartiromo
Hearing @jpmorgan ceo jamie Dimon will get treasury secy job. Big meeting tomorrow @MorningsMaria @FoxBusiness will discuss tmrw Maria Bartiromo @MariaBartiromo Sent With: Twitter for iPhone ...
 
I'm actually good with Jamie Dimon.

Yes, he's a banker/elite. And yes, Trump said he would "drain the swamp" and he didn't. If he were Secretary of State or something that would be a problem. But I mean, he's a big banker being tapped to run the world's biggest bank. He's qualified. I would be surprised however, if he took the job.

The whole "drain the swamp" thing has an anti-intellectual tone to it in some ways. No one likes crappy people who keep getting jobs because of their political connections. But at the same time, some lobbyists/insiders/elite are in those positions because they are good at what they do. Judge people on their qualifications, not on whether they are "establishment" or not.


edit: .....and he just turned it down.
 
ImpSaint said:
So what about Yasmin Alibah Brown and Diane Abbott in their newspaper articles? Can only white people be bigots? Should these publications be targeted too because we don't want their brand of racism either?
Click to expand...

If you feel they are bigots, by all means feel free not to purchase their newspapers. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm not denying your right to do anything I do myself. See how tolerant I am?

That's the difference between me and Breitbart.

I'm not calling them bigots because I disagree with them. I disagree with them because in my view they are bigots. I judge them based on what they've written. Breitbart doesn't give me the same respect. If I disagree with them, I must be some intolerant jerk.

As for the claim that only white/straight/some majority people can be bigots, of course that's untrue. Anyone can be a bigot. Milo Yiannopoulos is the one out there trying to play the "I'm gay, so how can I be anti-gay?" card, not me.
 
I Sorry I Ruined The Party said:
If you feel they are bigots, by all means feel free not to purchase their newspapers. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'm not denying your right to do anything I do myself. See how tolerant I am?

That's the difference between me and Breitbart.

I'm not calling them bigots because I disagree with them. I disagree with them because in my view they are bigots. I judge them based on what they've written. Breitbart doesn't give me the same respect. If I disagree with them, I must be some intolerant jerk.

As for the claim that only white/straight/some majority people can be bigots, of course that's untrue. Anyone can be a bigot. Milo Yiannopoulos is the one out there trying to play the "I'm gay, so how can I be anti-gay?" card, not me.
Click to expand...

I do do what you say in the first paragraph. I choose not to purchase those newspapers, although I do sometimes end up on them because of links.

However choosing not to read something is a bit different from trying to put them out of business.

I don't read Breitbart that much. I think it is much more of a satire that somehow is now taken as a serious news source.

From what I've read of Milo including a recent speech he made his only aim is to try and make everyone in the world hate him while he says "I don't care what you think." The guy is risking a bullet the way he talks. Very inflammatory. As for their articles. I have to take off my right wing hat to read anything on there because I need two left wing hats to counter the doubly biased towards the right / uncredible articles that Breitbart publishes.

People have been calling the Daily Mail "The Fail" for a long time, from both the left and right wing. I had never heard "Torygraph" until I heard it on this site though. That is not something that I see on other platforms.
 
Last edited:
Onionman said:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Torygraph&year_start=1980&year_end=2016&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1;,Torygraph;,c0

In use for the past thirty years.
Click to expand...

It may have been in use for thirty years but I had not seen it (and still don't see it) on any other site than this. Of course that limits it to sites I go on which many might be surprised to understand are varied and in the main left/liberal leaning.

I go on a lot of music sites that are very left leaning, many that are more left than this Saints section seems to be. A lot of niche hobby sites that are also pretty much liberal left leaning similar to this Saints section of not606 and then of course.

I go on some right leaning sites but there aren't really that many out there unless you want to go on things like Breitbart or similar which are a bit out there to say the least.

Like I say, this is the only site I have ever encountered "Torygraph" to my memory. There is a lot of linking Tory to the Telegraph on other sites I visit and a lot of criticism for right leaning just like other newspapers but no-one else seems to use the word "Torygraph" in the way "Daily Fail" and "Grauniad" is used on all platforms left and right.

Most people on the right don't like The Daily Mail just as they don't like The Guardian and the later incarnations of the Independent.
 
ImpSaint said:
I do do what you say in the first paragraph. I choose not to purchase those newspapers, although I do sometimes end up on them because of links.

However choosing not to read something is a bit different from trying to put them out of business.

I don't read Breitbart that much. I think it is much more of a satire that somehow is now taken as a serious news source.

From what I've read of Milo including a recent speech he made his only aim is to try and make everyone in the world hate him while he says "I don't care what you think." The guy is risking a bullet the way he talks. Very inflammatory. As for their articles. I have to take off my right wing hat to read anything on there because I need two left wing hats to counter the doubly biased towards the right / uncredible articles that Breitbart publishes.

People have been calling the Daily Mail "The Fail" for a long time, from both the left and right wing. I had never heard "Torygraph" until I heard it on this site though. That is not something that I see on other platforms.
Click to expand...

You said "do do"
 
ImpSaint said:
So what about Yasmin Alibah Brown and Diane Abbott in their newspaper articles? Can only white people be bigots? Should these publications be targeted too because we don't want their brand of racism either?



How far down the line will this go? This is just another attempt to silence anyone with a view that is not liberal. First the Mail, then the Express and the Telegraph, then follow down the line and they'll take out the Spectator and on and on until they've achieved their aim. The Guardian will get off scot-free (although it might go bankrupt anyway.)

Being liberal does not mean attempting to stop other people's viewpoints no matter how disgusting they are. There are laws against hate speech. If you think the Mail is guilty then report them.
Click to expand...


Yasmin Alibih Brown? You serious? I read loads of her articles when she used to write a column for the independant. Never came across anything that could be remotely construed as extremist or anti-white. You do know she is married to an English Christian, and has had stick for it from some extreme muslims?

As for Dianne Abbott, she's basically a nice middle class girl from Harrow who occasionally engages mouth before brain. Left wing certainly. Extremist, hardly.

Neither of that pair have ever been guilty of the kind of hateful racist propoganda which constitutes Mail and Express headlines on a daily basis. There's no equivalance here.

Democracy appears to me to be under existential threat from far right neo fascist groups around the world. The Daily Mail, true to historical form, and the Express are colluding in this phenomenon. I don't currently see any such threat coming from the far left, and none from supposedly left wing media.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back