Politics

[Rayvin 6719]

I'm wondering at what point Labour are expecting things to improve for them in terms of popular support - this cannot possibly be the strategy they're going to stick to running into the next GE. All these policies and statements which seem designed to alienate young, progressive voters, how on earth is this going to benefit them? I could buy it if they were picking up votes somewhere to the right but there's no evidence that they are. It feels like the whole thing is designed to suffocate the Tories but how does that help once Reform merge/ally/flat out replace them.

[Renton 25046]

54 minutes ago, spongebob toonpants said:

We had open borders with Europe and that helped raise the living standards in the less well of states. Surely that's the best evidence available that open borders is a good thing

An influx of healthy young workers who send money home then return when they've made some money is what happens in the majority of cases. Not to conflate economic refugees with asylum seekers whom I assume you wouldn't turn away

 

 

The EU is/was open borders as part of a Union bound by a common framework of values, beliefs, law, trade and shared competencies. It is a wonderful institution. And yes, the idea was to boost poorer nations like Poland, enriching us all ultimately as the market increased in size and value. And it worked, with Poland shortly surpassing us on GDP per capita.  But this has to be done cautiously and incrementally. The next step after the balkans would l guess be Turkey. But that won't happen in anyone's lifetime on here. Because they do not have shared values, are not fully democratic, have very dubious human rights, and do not meet the required economic conditions. After that would be Russia, aye, right.

 

We're never going to have any meaningful union with an African or Asian country, just isn't going to happen, for dozens of reasons. And anyway, taking their "healthy young workers" isn't doing those countries any favours. There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting your country, whether by itself or part of Union, to be self sufficient in terms of its work requirements. The aim should be to invest in Africa so it can flourish, not rob it of its human wealth and all the attendant problems this causes. I realise as well of course that this is never happening either. 

[Renton 25046]

10 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I'm wondering at what point Labour are expecting things to improve for them in terms of popular support - this cannot possibly be the strategy they're going to stick to running into the next GE. All these policies and statements which seem designed to alienate young, progressive voters, how on earth is this going to benefit them? I could buy it if they were picking up votes somewhere to the right but there's no evidence that they are. It feels like the whole thing is designed to suffocate the Tories but how does that help once Reform merge/ally/flat out replace them.

 

Is still specifically about Bridgets comments? I read them in the Guardian and can't say I found anything to disagree on?

[Rayvin 6719]

2 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Is still specifically about Bridgets comments? I read them in the Guardian and can't say I found anything to disagree on?

 

No, Starmer has come out droning on about trans people again but I didn't want to link it and end up in yet another back and forth about that, so I'm trying to keep it general.

[Renton 25046]

4 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

No, Starmer has come out droning on about trans people again but I didn't want to link it and end up in yet another back and forth about that, so I'm trying to keep it general.

 

Ah, right. I'll be honest and ignore all discussion about that no matter who from. I don't think these culture war subjects, wedge issues, have any place in politics. It's a big reason politics is failing imo. 

[Rayvin 6719]

7 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Ah, right. I'll be honest and ignore all discussion about that no matter who from. I don't think these culture war subjects, wedge issues, have any place in politics. It's a big reason politics is failing imo. 

 

I agree with you ultimately but nonetheless, these are the sorts of issues he will lose support over and I'm not seeing where he gains it otherwise. The right quite literally will never vote for him.

[Gemmill 53771]

Labour trying to woo the benefit cuts rebels by pointing out that, since their u-turn, it's now ONLY 150,000 people that will be pushed into poverty by the cuts, and not 250,000. 

 

I mean fucking hell. 

[Renton 25046]

Aye, honestly this Labour party is pathetic, politically clueless.

 

[Rayvin 6719]

If they just came out and pointed the finger at Brexit, I think these conversations would be a lot easier...

[Rayvin 6719]

"Economists and analysts at Cambridge Econometrics found that, by 2035, the UK is anticipated to have three million fewer jobs, 32% lower investment, 5% lower exports and 16% lower imports, than it would have had been. The report states that the UK will be £311bn worse off by 2035 due to leaving EU."

 

Our old people did this to us. I also checked the yearly loss to the public purse and it's estimated to be about £25bn a year. How much of this shit we're currently doing wouldn't have been necessary if we weren't so stupid...

[Howmanheyman 38975]

She's practicing what she's preaching TBF....

 

"We need more babies so climb aboard, let's breed!"

[Renton 25046]

6 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

"Economists and analysts at Cambridge Econometrics found that, by 2035, the UK is anticipated to have three million fewer jobs, 32% lower investment, 5% lower exports and 16% lower imports, than it would have had been. The report states that the UK will be £311bn worse off by 2035 due to leaving EU."

 

Our old people did this to us. I also checked the yearly loss to the public purse and it's estimated to be about £25bn a year. How much of this shit we're currently doing wouldn't have been necessary if we weren't so stupid...

 

But we got our sovereignty back. Stop complaining.

[Monkeys Fist 47256]

34 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

If they just came out and pointed the finger at Brexit, I think these conversations would be a lot easier...

I really don’t understand why someone from Labour hasn’t come out and made a statement about everything people were lied to about Brexit , and who lied to them. 

And, equally, the devastating effect it’s had on our living standards. 
 

There’s nowt wrong with telling people they made a mistake due to being lied to, especially since most of the fuckwits that voted for now realise that’s the case. 
 

It’s all perfectly provable, and they could use parliamentary privilege if they were unduly worried about Farage sueing or whatever, because he’s No. 1 suspect here. 

[spongebob toonpants 4658]

14 minutes ago, Monkeys Fist said:

I really don’t understand why someone from Labour hasn’t come out and made a statement about everything people were lied to about Brexit , and who lied to them. 

And, equally, the devastating effect it’s had on our living standards. 
 

There’s nowt wrong with telling people they made a mistake due to being lied to, especially since most of the fuckwits that voted for now realise that’s the case. 
 

It’s all perfectly provable, and they could use parliamentary privilege if they were unduly worried about Farage sueing or whatever, because he’s No. 1 suspect here. 

Until somebody does the country will remain fucked. Amongst all Starmer’s failings the refusal to tell the truth about Brexit is the most damaging and the most depressing 

I fucking despise the cowardly cunt

[Rayvin 6719]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70rreer004o - Parental leave and pay for new parents to be reviewed

 

Gammons in the comments complaining about why they have to pay for other people to have kids. I guarantee that these idiots haven't connected this to immigration and will happily crow about that at the same time. Either we have more kids, or we have high immigration - which is it, you clueless fucking muppets. You can't whine about both things at the same time.

[Alex 38462]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70rreer004o - Parental leave and pay for new parents to be reviewed

 

Gammons in the comments complaining about why they have to pay for other people to have kids. I guarantee that these idiots haven't connected this to immigration and will happily crow about that at the same time. Either we have more kids, or we have high immigration - which is it, you clueless fucking muppets. You can't whine about both things at the same time.

They’ll be the same ones saying we should look after our own whilst kicking off about free school meals 

[Howmanheyman 38975]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70rreer004o - Parental leave and pay for new parents to be reviewed

 

Gammons in the comments complaining about why they have to pay for other people to have kids. I guarantee that these idiots haven't connected this to immigration and will happily crow about that at the same time. Either we have more kids, or we have high immigration - which is it, you clueless fucking muppets. You can't whine about both things at the same time.

 

7 minutes ago, Alex said:

They’ll be the same ones saying we should look after our own whilst kicking off about free school meals 

 

 

 

Should've made the lass white for extra gammon kick off motivation.

[Rayvin 6719]

It fucking would have as well. Maybe not directly into the comments but on some level they'd have been seething.

[Dazzler 13199]

1 hour ago, Howmanheyman said:

 

 

 

 

Should've made the lass white for extra gammon kick off motivation.

It would have been funnier to only make the baby white IMO

[Monkeys Fist 47256]

13 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

It would have been funnier to only make the baby white IMO

Black mam, White mam in a hijab, Chinese bairn- Gammon bingo house! 

[ewerk 35003]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70rrld1nlpo
 

It’s quite something when the government are more concerned with music acts criticising Israel’s actions in Gaza than they are with the actual actions themselves.

[Renton 25046]

2 hours ago, Rayvin said:

It fucking would have as well. Maybe not directly into the comments but on some level they'd have been seething.

 

Didn't they kick off about a John Lewis ad for this very reason some years ago?

 

[Renton 25046]

59 minutes ago, ewerk said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70rrld1nlpo
 

It’s quite something when the government are more concerned with music acts criticising Israel’s actions in Gaza than they are with the actual actions themselves.

 

Yeah, I thought this watching the BBC news last night.

Story 1, about kneecap and and this Bob Vylan duo being antisemitic and facing years in prison, for chanting "death to the IDF". [Does that fuck make you antisemitic imo]

Next story. IDF have massacred starving people in Gaza as they queued for food, AGAIN.

 

 

The world has turned insane, it started around 10 years ago and just gets worse and worse.

 

[Alex 38462]

There was an incident a while back where a Palestinian lad the same age as my eldest was shot and killed. His family said he was gathering almonds and the Israeli government spokesperson said they were a terrorist throwing stones at cars on a busy road. Now even if you accept the latter version, they’re basically admitting they think it’s justifiable to kill kids for throwing stones. I know that’s just one drop in a sea of tragedies but how is it somehow worse in the eyes of government to criticise the IDF, however clumsily? Actually then talking about prosecuting them as well? I don’t see how it’s hate speech. I actually think conflating the IDF and its actions with all Jewish people, which is essentially what is being done with the reaction, is far worse. On top of which there will be more people happy to use it to bash the bbc than there will be people with genuine concerns about antisemitism. 

Edited 9 hours ago by Alex

[Rayvin 6719]

I was reading Labour's guidelines on antisemitism which are informed by the IHRA. I don't understand how we've gotten to where we are:

 

13. In contrast, discussion of the circumstances of the foundation of the Israeli State (for example, in the context of its impact on the Palestinian people) forms a legitimate part of modern political discourse. So does discussion of – including critical comment on – differential impact of Israeli laws or policies on different people within its population or that of neighbouring territories. It is not racist to assess the conduct of Israel – or indeed of any other particular State or government – against the requirements of international law or the standards of behaviour expected of democratic States (bearing in mind that these requirements and standards may themselves be contentious).

 

14. However, care must be taken when dealing with these topics. The fact of Israel’s description as a Jewish State does not make it permissible to hold Jewish people or institutions in general responsible for alleged misconduct on the part of that State (see paragraph 9.g.). In addition, it is wrong to apply double standards by requiring more vociferous condemnation of such actions from Jewish people or organisations than from others – a form of racist treatment also all too common in other contexts, eg. holding Muslims or Muslim organisations to a higher standard than others as regards condemnation of illegal or violent acts by self-defining “Islamic” organisations or States (such as Saudi Arabia or Pakistan). It is also wrong to accuse Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

 

15. The term “Zionism” is intimately bound up in the history of Israel’s foundation as a State and in its role in international relations more generally. It is inevitable that the expressions “Zionism” and “Zionist” will feature in political discourse about these topics. The meaning of these expressions is itself debated. It is not antisemitism to refer to “Zionism” and “Zionists” as part of a considered discussion about the Israeli State. However, as the Chakrabarti Report advised, it is not permissible to use “Zionist” (and still less any pejorative abbreviation such as ‘zio’ which the Chakrabarti report said should have no place in Labour Party discourse) as a code word for “Jew”. Chakrabarti recommended that Labour Party members should only use “the term `Zionist’ advisedly, carefully and never euphemistically or as part of personal abuse”. Such language may otherwise provide evidence of antisemitic intent.

 

I would fundamentally agree on every word of that. What I'm struggling with is why the IDF are some sort of protected characteristic. It's in poor taste to chant for their death absolutely, I don't condone it and I would never say it (same as for Russian troops) - but at the same time it doesn't feel like antisemitism per these definitions.

In the end though I think we just need to make peace with this - the government has chosen a side and it's Israel/Trump. I'm increasingly concerned about being watchlisted over expressing views about this in case I need to travel to the US tbh, or indeed being charged with terrorism by the UK.