Politics

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3206]

35 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Ok.

 

1 - KCG, you called me a Nazi because I criticised SJWs. I continue to do this so therefore I must remain a Nazi to you. Hope this helps.

 

2 - Gloom, you don't believe this story gets more coverage than anything else. I'm incredulous at that claim but this is your industry so if that's your position then fine. Looking at it based on perspective though, given that my view is that it does get more coverage than literally every other issue save Brexit, can you see why I have my suspicions about the underlying motive? 

 

3 - an investigation into the issue sounds like a good thing to me, and the outcome of the investigation would indeed be newsworthy. 

 

4 - ewerk, that particular point was previously unknown to me. Fucking clearly that is antisemitic and should have been dealt with. That is what actual evidence looks like, incidentally. Well done.

Didn’t you say there’s no such thing as white privilege or male privilege?

[Dr Gloom 19837]

 

43 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Ok.

 

1 - KCG, you called me a Nazi because I criticised SJWs. I continue to do this so therefore I must remain a Nazi to you. Hope this helps.

 

2 - Gloom, you don't believe this story gets more coverage than anything else. I'm incredulous at that claim but this is your industry so if that's your position then fine. Looking at it based on perspective though, given that my view is that it does get more coverage than literally every other issue save Brexit, can you see why I have my suspicions about the underlying motive? 

 

3 - an investigation into the issue sounds like a good thing to me, and the outcome of the investigation would indeed be newsworthy. 

 

4 - ewerk, that particular point was previously unknown to me. Fucking clearly that is antisemitic and should have been dealt with. That is what actual evidence looks like, incidentally. Well done.

I’ve posted plenty of actual evidence of anti-semitism in the Labour Party. First you dismissed it, insisting it was confined to twitter trolls. After I demonstrated this isn’t the case you questioned the evidence because it was sourced from the “MSM”. Like that means we shouldn’t trust the reporting.

I don’t believe this story gets blanket coverage across all media outlets at the expense of everything else, sorry, particularly the stories you cited. It might feel that way but that’s probably because you don’t like what is being reported. You don’t want to believe it could happen to the Labour Party, which explains why you reject evidence and constantly demand to see more. 

The Times splashed with a knife crime story yesterday, for example. Not for the first time in recent weeks. Where was the uproar that too much media attention is being spent on knife crime? Where are the cries that it’s a mainstream media source and that we need more evidence before we believe the county has a knife crime problem? We don’t, right? We trust the reporting and are shocked by it.

The antisemtism story is widely reported on for good reason and believe it or not, it’s in the public interest if the leader of opposition is turning a blind eye to it in his party.

Believe me, our UK editors aren’t sending our political reporters out to get digging to smear Corbyn on this issue every day. He’s doing all the work for them, hand-delivering it on a plate.

[Rayvin 4964]

11 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

Didn’t you say there’s no such thing as white privilege or male privilege?

 

I think you may have called me it a few times. I did a quick scan back through the Social Justice Warrior thread and one of the occasions was for stating that the anarcho-communists were complicit in creating disturbances with the alt right. I stand by that because it's true:

 

On 14/08/2017 at 07:58, Rayvin said:

I'm just going off what I've seen but if you have evidence to the contrary I'm all ears. Again though, I don't mean this specific protest. I have no idea what happened there. I mean Antifa settings things on fire, launching fireworks at people (not Nazis, just Trump supporters) pummelling people when they're down until they lose consciousness, marching through town centres with automatic weapons, and now apparently shooting people.

 

If I was a Nazi, the above would be an open invitation for escalation. By allowing Antifa to do this stuff, we've given Trump the excuse he needs to say both sides are in the wrong. They are. Ideological views to one side (both ideologies are fucking mental) they're both behaving like each other as far as I've seen.

 

I think the wider context was that you took issue with me drawing similarities between them, although since I was rejecting both I'm not sure why you felt this meant I was aligning myself with one side in particular. But I'm used to it, I get called a Communist and a bleeding heart liberal as often as I get called a Nazi - as evidenced by the terrorism thread and my longstanding views that Islam itself isn't the main driver of terrorism, the issue instead being economic factors leading to alienation and disenfranchisement, and poor Western foreign policy. That wasn't a hugely popular view on here either. 

 

I don't agree with white privilege per se, although I do agree that native privilege exists. I mean I lived in China and didn't have 'white privilege' there, unless being charged more for everything counts as a 'privilege'. Within the confines of Western society, I do agree that native privilege = white privilege.

 

I think men and women have different privileges based on their genders. I don't think it's all one way.

 

All this back on the table, I'm ready to resume my status as a Nazi cunt.

[ewerk 26439]

Try explaining native privilege to native Americans.

[Rayvin 4964]

1 minute ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

I’ve posted plenty of actual evidence of anti-semitism in the Labour Party. First you dismissed it, insisting it was confined to twitter trolls. After I demonstrated this isn’t the case you questioned the evidence because it was sourced from the “MSM”. Like that means we shouldn’t trust the reporting.

I don’t believe this story gets blanket coverage across all media outlets at the expense of everything else, sorry, particularly the stories you cited. It might feel that way but that’s probably because you don’t like what is being reported. You don’t want to believe it could happen to the Labour Party, which explains why you reject evidence and constantly demand to see more. 

The Times splashed with a knife crime story yesterday, for example. Not for the first time in recent weeks. Where was the uproar that too much media attention is being spent on knife crime? Where are the cries that it’s a mainstream media source and that we need more evidence before we believe the county has a knife crime problem? We don’t, right? We trust the reporting and are shocked by it.

The antisemtism story is widely reported on for good reason and believe it or not, it’s in the public interest if the leader of opposition is turning a blind eye to it in his party.

Believe me, our UK editors aren’t sending our political reporters out to get digging to smear Corbyn on this issue every day. He’s doing all the work for them, hand-delivering it on a plate.

 

Can you just answer my question? Given how I perceive it, can you understand my position, as much as you may dismiss away the basis for it.

 

I also think you've taken a lot of what I've said about this as a direct challenge to things you've posted. It's not really. I'm also going to stress that I'm not a member of the Labour party and this isn't some tribal thing for me. Labour are going to crash and burn under Corbyn anyway, as they will under McDonnell. The establishment isn't going to let this happen and that's just how it is. I also think you're being ridiculous in your comparison with knife crime. There must have been about 20 or 30 different headlines in the guardian alone about antisemitism in the past week, and I think I've seen a single one about knife crime. Maybe it's a guardian issue more than anything else truthfully, it would explain why we're so at odds on this.

[Rayvin 4964]

5 minutes ago, ewerk said:

Try explaining native privilege to native Americans.

 

I nearly caveated this in but I'm sick of having to put up defences for every bad faith counter that gets thrown at me.

 

Yes ewerk, clearly in the case of a genocide and the resultant demographic shift that happens, the situation is different. Theoretically at least. Taken looking only at the past 100 years (say) it becomes irrelevant again apart from a semantic issue.

Edited March 7, 2019 by Rayvin

[ewerk 26439]

There we go again with the antisemantism.

[Dr Gloom 19837]

34 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Can you just answer my question? Given how I perceive it, can you understand my position, as much as you may dismiss away the basis for it.

 

I also think you've taken a lot of what I've said about this as a direct challenge to things you've posted. It's not really. I'm also going to stress that I'm not a member of the Labour party and this isn't some tribal thing for me. Labour are going to crash and burn under Corbyn anyway, as they will under McDonnell. The establishment isn't going to let this happen and that's just how it is. I also think you're being ridiculous in your comparison with knife crime. There must have been about 20 or 30 different headlines in the guardian alone about antisemitism in the past week, and I think I've seen a single one about knife crime. Maybe it's a guardian issue more than anything else truthfully, it would explain why we're so at odds on this.

I think I do understand your position and I have tried to answer you. I think your perception of the coverage is shaped by your denial that the problem exists. It seems like the coverage is disproportionate because you don’t want to believe it.

How come something I don’t see, or I don’t want to see, is getting so much attention when there are so many other important stories that we should be reading about? I get that and I can understand why that doesn’t compute and why it must be tempting to think there is some kind of media conspiracy to use this story as a weapon to remove Corbyn.

In my experience, there is no conspiracy. “The establishment”, whatever the fuck that means, don’t get to pull all the strings in today’s politics. You only have to look at Trump in the US and Corbyn making ground at the last election. Hardly results the establishment wanted. 

You may have rejected the Labour Party and you may no longer feel part of that tribe. But I do believe you’re an old fashioned socialist and these are the like-minded people we’re talking about so yes, there is a tribal element to this. I consider myself an old fashioned lefty too, which is why I’m so appalled by what I’ve read. Other well-meaning socialists deal with the antisemitism by dismissing it. Others do it by siding with the bigots.

Edited March 7, 2019 by Dr Gloom

[ewerk 26439]

'The Establishment' is just a regional division of the New World Order.

Run by Jews obvs.

[Rayvin 4964]

1 minute ago, Dr Gloom said:

I think I do understand your position and I have tried to answer you. I think your perception of the coverage is shaped by your denial that the problem exists. It seems like the coverage is disproportionate because you don’t want to believe it.

How come something I don’t see, or I don’t want to see, is getting so much attention when there are so many other important stories that we should be reading about? I get that and I can understand why that doesn’t compute and why it must be tempting to think there is some kind of media conspiracy to use this story as a weapon to remove Corbyn.

In my experience, there is no conspiracy. “The establishment”, whatever the fuck that means, don’t get to pull all the strings in today’s politics. You only have to look at Trump in the US and Corbyn making ground at the last election. Hardly results the establishment wanted. 

You may have rejected the Labour Party and you may no longer feel part of that tribe. But I do believe you’re an old fashioned socialist and these are the people we’re talking about so yes, there is a tribal element to this. I consider myself an old fashioned lefty too, which is why I’m so appalled by what I’ve read. Other well-meaning socialists deal with the antisemitism by dismissing it. Others do it by siding with the bigots.

 

Well you're wrong in your characterization of my priorities I'm afraid. I'm not dismissing that there's a problem with antisemitism - if there is, there is. My issue, and this may be worse from your point of view, is that it isn't as big a deal as a series of other issues that are being sidelined as a result of the attention it's getting. Coupled with the fact that the reason this is such a big issue, is because it has useful side effects.

 

I don't not want to see it, it's just that until someone dies as a result of an antisemitic attack by a member of the Labour party, for me, it's not as big a deal as the 10 kids who have been knifed to death this year so far - I feel that this is an acceptable moral position, and so have to then look at why the media does not appear to share it. That's the full extent of my issue. That's it. I'm sorry if that isn't an acceptable view, but honestly, I'm amazed anyone could disagree.

[Rayvin 4964]

Every now and then, talking on here reminds me why the centre got such a massive arse kicking across the world in the past 5 years  

 

I see the Guardian released a report stating that populist rhetoric is on the rise in political speeches around the world. Great news, that. We're doing so well at combating these issues by just running around calling everyone racists.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/mar/06/revealed-the-rise-and-rise-of-populist-rhetoric

[Dr Gloom 19837]

13 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Well you're wrong in your characterization of my priorities I'm afraid. I'm not dismissing that there's a problem with antisemitism - if there is, there is. My issue, and this may be worse from your point of view, is that it isn't as big a deal as a series of other issues that are being sidelined as a result of the attention it's getting. Coupled with the fact that the reason this is such a big issue, is because it has useful side effects.

 

I don't not want to see it, it's just that until someone dies as a result of an antisemitic attack by a member of the Labour party, for me, it's not as big a deal as the 10 kids who have been knifed to death this year so far - I feel that this is an acceptable moral position, and so have to then look at why the media does not appear to share it. That's the full extent of my issue. That's it. I'm sorry if that isn't an acceptable view, but honestly, I'm amazed anyone could disagree.

well, you asked for it. so let's use this thread to start keeping a daily track on the "MSM" newspaper front pages to see if you have a point. 

let's start with today. lots of knife crime stories, not a single antisemitism story. we'll be back with part two tomorrow

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs/the_papers

[the other issues aren't being sidelined, it's all about your perception of this story, i'm afraid]

[Rayvin 4964]

9 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

well, you asked for it. so let's use this thread to start keeping a daily track on the "MSM" newspaper front pages to see if you have a point. 

let's start with today. lots of knife crime stories, not a single antisemitism story. we'll be back with part two tomorrow

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs/the_papers

[the other issues aren't being sidelined, it's all about your perception of this story, i'm afraid]

 

Yeah ok, you win. I mean I could point out that starting from today proves nothing about what has brought us to this point in the argument but honestly, you may well be right about the whole thing.

I need to stay out of this thread.

[Dr Gloom 19837]

to be fair, you brought it up first. if we keep track of this, we can establish which stories newspaper editors are prioritising, whether it reflects what you have been arguing, and whether the antisemitism story is indeed being given a disproportionate number of column inches. you made some pretty bold claims on that. it may feel to you like it is getting blanket coverage compared to every other story other than brexit, but that's not the reality i'm living in. let's find out if i'm a deluded. but if we discover it doesn't dominate our front pages to the extent you contend, perhaps you'll view the antisemitism story differently when it does crop up. 

Edited March 7, 2019 by Dr Gloom

[Rayvin 4964]

I brought this up first and have spent about 3 pages trying to outline the same point over and over until someone would actually grasp it, amidst constant sniping. Par for the course but I just can't be fucked anymore.

 

What you've proposed does sound sensible. Good luck with it.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Don’t worry @Rayvin Amber Rudd has just referred to Diane Abbott as “coloured”. Pressure off

[Dr Gloom 19837]

10 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I brought this up first and have spent about 3 pages trying to outline the same point over and over until someone would actually grasp it, amidst constant sniping. Par for the course but I just can't be fucked anymore.

 

What you've proposed does sound sensible. Good luck with it.

you call that sniping? i've been reasoned and civil.

why not just admit you're a massive antisemite? 

[Gemmill 34593]

13 minutes ago, Christmas Tree said:

Don’t worry @Rayvin Amber Rudd has just referred to Diane Abbott as “coloured”. Pressure off

 

She's apologised now. Unreal though. 

 

Makes the jew hunter Rayvin look like Oscar Schindler. 

[Gemmill 34593]

The antisemitism stuff is FOR SURE getting disproportionate press coverage btw. It's why I only read Heat Magazine these days. 

[ewerk 26439]

8 minutes ago, Christmas Tree said:

Don’t worry @Rayvin Amber Rudd has just referred to Diane Abbott as “coloured”. Pressure off

A minister literally said yesterday that the army shooting innocent individuals isn't a crime and no one batted an eyelid. There's pretty much no offence that will get a minister sacked these days.

[Gemmill 34593]

7 minutes ago, ewerk said:

A minister literally said yesterday that the army shooting innocent individuals isn't a crime and no one batted an eyelid. There's pretty much no offence that will get a minister sacked these days.

 

Innocent IRISH individuals. That's why no one batted an eyelid. 

[Christmas Tree 3997]

9 minutes ago, ewerk said:

A minister literally said yesterday that the army shooting innocent individuals isn't a crime and no one batted an eyelid. There's pretty much no offence that will get a minister sacked these days.

 

She had to do a “grovelling” apology today. (I haven’t seen it so don’t know how grovelling it was).

 

Tory party ran out of talent years ago.

[Gemmill 34593]

Temporary ceasefire between Rayvin and Gloom. Peace in the Middle East. 

[Renton 17820]

37 minutes ago, ewerk said:

A minister literally said yesterday that the army shooting innocent individuals isn't a crime and no one batted an eyelid. There's pretty much no offence that will get a minister sacked these days.

 

When she was promoted to the post, didn't she admit she didn't realise there were sectarian issues in NI. I mean holy fuck. She could have just watched Derry Girls. Or Londonderry Girls. Or Derry/Londonderry Girls. 

[Dr Gloom 19837]

1 hour ago, Gemmill said:

 

She's apologised now. Unreal though. 

 

Makes the jew hunter Rayvin look like Oscar Schindler.