• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

|OT| British Election mega-thread - 12th December 2019 : Let's try again, again.

llien

Member
Feb 1, 2017
6,949
4,324
775
I was responding to your assertion that “There is also no other country ruled by people buthurt about losing Cold War” in reference to Russia.
Yes. Re-read it.

China is way more butthurt about losing wars.
No, it isn't. For starters, people who lost those wars are long dead.
(Want to see what happens when that's not the case? Check out what happened in Germany after it lost the first World War, to feel the difference.)

Mr Putler, on the other hand, is quite alive and his ass still feels the pain inflicted by US winning the cold war.

If one had to look back into history, Russia had FIVE CENTURIES of humiliation (by Mongols and Tatars). It ended only around 1700.
 
Last edited:
Dec 25, 2018
2,634
2,254
715
Manchester, England
The game has changed massively since the election. Any hope of the UK remaining in the EU has now vanished and we will be unlikely to be seeing any more of these types of visits to the EU but anti-Brexit MPs. Their only purpose was to undermine Brexit, and without them poised to stab the UK in the back, the EU will now take things much more seriously.



I personally wouldn't be against putting the EU trade deal on the backburner. Sorting out other deals first (Aus and NZ could be quick wins, US and Japan etc could come later) would put more pressure on the EU. The EU has a £94bn bilateral trade surplus in goods with the UK, and the prospect of tariff-free new world wines and agricultural products from Aus/South America would certainly focus minds in France, as cheap cars and other manufactures from Japan and Korea would focus minds in Germany. The EU has had its fun playing divide and rule during the previous Remainer parliament - maybe it's our turn now.

Although Theresa May said that Britain would support the security of Europe in any eventuality, it could be put on the table by Boris. As the EU is fond of saying, there can be no cherry picking, and that should include the UK's defence of the eastern border of the EU. It would be had to argue that Britain should be willing to sacrifice the lives of its soldiers to protect a vindictive EU.

This is an interesting article on the new landscape:
The EU must rethink its approach to UK trade talks











All that said, I'm pretty optimistic of the UK and the EU coming to an amicable arrangement. I don't see the Conservative's new northern constituencies being terribly keen on the low-regulation "Singapore-on-Thames" model, and the new government doesn't seem to want to move n that direction, so they could easily reach some kind of level playing field agreement. So long as they are making good progress, then extending the transition period deadline shouldn't be a problem. Boris has 5 years with a big majority, stronger than pretty much any other major EU leader (lame-duck Merkel, Macron facing more strikes, Spain weak and divided, Italy's minority technocratic governemtn with Salvini waiting in the wings etc).

I think Boris will go for a fairly soft Brexit (so long as the EU play nice)
Don't forget that even Merkel is looking over her own shoulder due to the Right Wing Extremists.

I honestly think we can do much better reaching out to other countries and not heavily rely on the EU.

Scotland want to stay in as they probably get subsidised by the EU and England as their Unemployment rate is terrible and they don't offer enough as a Country to keep themselves afloat (the Panama Disaster in the 1800s comes to mind regarding how they went alone but stuck with the UK when the British Empire was a thing).

The only concern I have, which was a good idea by the EU is standards on Food, Materials and Workers Rights (not that the UK took the latters policies after Thatcher) gets worse as we rush in taking deals without any safeguards, and I don't trust the Tories enough to think those through enough.

However, European countries like Belgium and the Netherlands have always been good allies to us that perhaps we should prioritise our Deals with them first once we have done Deals with Commonwealth Countries and Asia/America.

As for a strong hand, the EU will still be funny with us regardless of a Majority Government as they can't buckle if they wish to keep the EU as airtight as a Nun's Crutch. Hopefully Boris has enough balls to call them out and demand terms on a better deal or we walk away.
 

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
18,643
33,588
1,450
Australia
Yes. Re-read it.


No, it isn't. For starters, people who lost those wars are long dead.
(Want to see what happens when that's not the case? Check out what happened in Germany after it lost the first World War, to feel the difference.)

Mr Putler, on the other hand, is quite alive and his ass still feels the pain inflicted by US winning the cold war.

If one had to look back into history, Russia had FIVE CENTURIES of humiliation (by Mongols and Tatars). It ended only around 1700.
What do you think culture is? You don’t think that shit is heritable?
 

RokkanStoned

Member
Jan 14, 2018
2,122
2,356
585
Norway
No. There is no "so is". What you are trying to do is downplaying a major problem, which seems to be driven by the fact that you have problems admitting some foreign motehrfuckers might be adding votes to the motherfucker you chose to vote for.

There is no other country in this world, where series about Einstein turns into "look how Bad Filthy and Despicable USA is".
There is also no other country ruled by people buthurt about losing cold war.
USSR isn't Russia, even if current Russia is the aftermath of the USSR, combined with capitalist mobster oligarchs. It seems you're trying too hard on the Russia issue, especially due to your own history.

Now, "Russia" is overall a russophobic panic, which isn't something new historically. Ever since the end of the Napoleonic wars, whereupon Russia's sphere of influence extended further westwards, there's been a constant russophobic presence in Europe. My own country, Norway, has a long history starting from the 1830s about a fear of a russian invasion due to ice free ports in the North. Further intensified with the Crimean War, but also a general uncertainty about the Northern Lapplands, where Sami and Kven people were considered a security risk, especially due to being a minority with a different language and less integrated in the strong national identity that was being formed with the nationalism of the 19th century. Later things settled down a bit in regards to Russia, with finnish independence, but that made Finland just the big danger that was perceived instead. All in all, the fears that existed had no basis whatsoever, but was a part of a constantly recurring fear mongering campaign that was caused due to talks in the UK in the 1820-30s. After the Russian revolution, the USSR having been established, there was a sort of ambivalent feeling towards the USSR in Norway, with a lot of apologists on the left in regards to the cruelties and purges in the USSR in the 1930s. Despite this being the time where the Norwegian Labour party dominated, it was a time where it also was at a crossroads in regards to the relationship with communism, until it was ultimately settled after WW2, with the Kråkerøy speech, that made the Labour party stand in clear opposition of communism. After WW2, Norway got Marshall help and become members of NATO, leading them towards the US side of the bipolar international system back then with the US vs USSR. That also lead to a tough position, but with Norway attempting to balance their neighbour with their position in NATO, trying to de-escalate and prevent disaster. At this point you even had a new generation of youths growing up rebelling against the previous generation's traditionalist view of the USSR and also being a part of a youth movement that was more left-wing and embracing a sort of idealized look of the USSR, though most of them obviously grew out of the most of it. Then, of course, the Berlin Wall was brought down and the USSR split up. Oh, and of course, the US had their stint of Red Scare and McCarthyism, due to communist panic and fears, from the 1947 and at least throughout the 1950s.

Now, we suddenly have the latest with the overly magnified fear of Russia again. Of course, Russia is always trying to secure its own interests and keeping dominance of their political geosphere, as well as possibly expanding it and finding means of economic growth, so naivete is not something to treat Russia with. After all, look what happened with the western failures of Ukraine, where the Russian response should've been expected, but little was done in order to cull it. Instead a lot of military people, Norwegian ones included, imagined they'd break Russia through sanctions, which is honestly just a mistake and further showing a NATO vs Russia paradigm. France and Germany have tried a different solution, trying to broker between Ukraine and Russia, in order to secure eastern Ukraine, although Crimea is clearly lost. This again is also part of France and Germany's self interests due to them being sorta opposed to a lot of the sanctions that have been imposed on Russia.

But some crappy facebook memes by a russian costing barely any money ($100,000) isn't really "interference in the election", at least on any level that people should care much. Oh, and the failures of Podesta and Hillary in cybersecurity is laughable and anyone thinking the US isn't doing the same thing the other way are ridiculous, which again just points out the hypocrisy of this sort of righteous indignation. That's without people seemingly caring that European countries tries to interfere with US election. That's of course sensible, because people should be able to speak and influence, even if they're from another country. "Adding votes" is such a ridiculous statement in this context, because it really doesn't make much sense. The security of the election, in terms of actual voting ballots, is the foremost concern and generally the only concern where hypocrisy is less likely to be prevalent. A candidate for offices being a literal russian undercover asset, might be another, albeit that seems like a rather unlikely thing. Expecting Russia to further devalue their economy by sending more money out of the country, is also unlikely, so spending too much money abroad during a US election, where it might all get caught up and wasted, is also unlikely. What's far more safe for Russia is stirring internal turmoil in the US, which isn't about a specific side, but rather leaving the US paralyzed by the internal turmoil to stand united. More so, the US generally tend to be rather unified on Foreign Policy, so influencing the election rarely does change that much. (just look at the US history. The latest is Trump, who wanted to get out of conflicts, but still kinda got stuck in them. The US is driven, much like Russia, by a need to exert influence and gain control of whatever they seek) Oh, and what would especially be effective, would be something targeting the ballot boxes and the electronic votes, which could ensure them full control over which candidate they'd get, unlike wide overspending on ads would do.

Russian hysteria is overblown, although there are legitimate concerns about Russia, those are not the ones that are actually being discussed and things that are minimal are instead getting overblown, due to domestic issues, which suits Russia rather well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kenpachii

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
4,324
7,867
670
Unfortunately activists (and it's clear he is one) will continue to be dicks. I do see elsewhere though that, outside of the Labour Party itself, people are finally starting to get it, the stuff I've been banging on about for months re them hating the working class is actually starting to appear in places like The Guardian. There is hope I think, because eventually enough pressure will be brought to bear on a broken Labour Party that it will have to listen.
 
Dec 15, 2011
6,137
14,805
1,090
How's it feel, fellow "deplorables"?
Feels good man.

As I said a couple of weeks before the election, democracy was the umbrella issue that everything else would be secondary to. Which parties were involved in a democratic process that were promising to ignore past democratic processes? They were off my list. Labour, though I have voted for them in the past, with the endorsement of Corbyn and their adoption of identity-politics and far-left talking points were the easiest for me to dismiss.

Refuse to engage with me, call me names, slander me, show contempt?
That's up to you. But it won't me me vote for you or have me empathise with your argument.
Ever.
 
Last edited:

KINGMOKU

Member
May 16, 2005
6,893
3,643
1,500
Feels good man.

As I said a couple of weeks before the election, democracy was the umbrella issue that everything else would be secondary to. Which parties were involved in a democratic process that were promising to ignore past democratic processes? They were off my list. Labour, though I have voted for them in the past, with the endorsement of Corbyn and their adoption of identity-politics and far-left talking points were the easiest for me to dismiss.

Refuse to engage with me, call me names, slander me, show contempt?
That's up to you. But it won't me me vote for you or have me empathise with your argument.
Ever.
Amazing how it sounds exactly like me now. 2016 election was brutal, and difficult. Now it's simple. Democrats hate me, and hate America and it's traditions.

Super easy call now.

In a wierd way, this trend of "tear it all down becuase white people/straight people suck and socialism/communism rules" has really clarified politics for me. Life has never been better for so many people on this planet, and they want to end that.

Simple vote for me, and in many ways the easiest of my life.
 

autoduelist

Member
Aug 30, 2014
11,883
19,681
855
No. There is no "so is". What you are trying to do is downplaying a major problem, which seems to be driven by the fact that you have problems admitting some foreign motehrfuckers might be adding votes to the motherfucker you chose to vote for.

There is no other country in this world, where series about Einstein turns into "look how Bad Filthy and Despicable USA is".
There is also no other country ruled by people buthurt about losing cold war.
Yes, there is "so is". You don't get to dictate world threats just because you bold random words.

I have literally posted videos on this site with ex-kgb agents discussing how to destroy america. In the post you are responding to, i actually mention a real tactic used to influence elections mentioned by Mueller. I am not having 'problems' admitting the Russians may be involved... in fact, i absolutely agree they are.

And i didn't vote for Trump.

They are sowing seeds of dissent. Yes. Agreed. That doesn't mean they want Trump to win, or Brexit to happen. It means they want to, as i said, destroy internal cohesion and cripple sovereignty.

Trump and Brexit are not good for Russia, or China. Not compared to the far left, to HRC. When you take that into consideration, and start thinking chess instead of checkers, the gameboard changes. What caused more impact? A couple facebook groups with low membership trying to 'influence' the election, or... 3 years of the press telling us Trump is a Russian agent?

Magic tricks are easy to spot if you know what to look for.
 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
35,105
2,427
1,475
Yeah, and the words "enemy" and "Japanese" are synonymous.
And so fucking what?
That's not true... And China's grudge goes deeper than just Japan. There is still a lot of animosity towards Britain and other western nations for their direct meddling in the country even before Japan got strong enough to invade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: matt404au

DV27

Member
Jun 14, 2010
11,277
463
915
Labour is yapping the same thing the Dems here are spouting.... Torries won, we need to change the system!
It's a typical left thing. Stay quiet when the electoral system produces a result you like, cry like a baby at it when it doesn't.

They'll do basically anything to delfect accountability away from them, the precious little things..
 
  • Like
Reactions: hariseldon
Dec 25, 2018
2,634
2,254
715
Manchester, England
One of the Labour MPs are suing the other for calling her Voters "Idiots" for voting for Brexit.

She got called out and is now going to "Sue" that MP for telling it how it is.


Is this Labour's version of #CancelCulture now? Why can't she just say "I didn't say that, my fellow colleague is talking crap?" and then be done with it?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hariseldon

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
4,324
7,867
670
One of the Labour MPs are suing the other for calling her Voters "Idiots" for voting for Brexit.

She got called out and is now going to "Sue" that MP for telling it how it is.


Is this Labour's version of #CancelCulture now? Why can't she just say "I didn't say that, my fellow colleague is talking crap?" and then be done with it?
Because Thornberry is a cunt, the embodiment of the entitled cuntitude of the modern Labour Party.
 

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
35,105
2,427
1,475
Good thing Boris is going to save the British public from those unelected bureaucrat elites...

Sky News: Nicky Morgan handed peerage to keep cabinet job in PM's post-election mini reshuffle
Not sure that's a good comparison. The democratically elected Prime Minister is allowed to select and dismiss (well, technically, it's the monarch acting on the PM's advice) the members of his or her cabinet and there is no requirement that they be an elected member of parliament.
 

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
18,643
33,588
1,450
Australia
Not sure that's a good comparison. The democratically elected Prime Minister is allowed to select and dismiss (well, technically, it's the monarch acting on the PM's advice) the members of his or her cabinet and there is no requirement that they be an elected member of parliament.
Yep, that was a really dumb comment you were replying to. In the US, you vote directly for your leader. In the UK and its derived democracies like Canada and Australia, you vote for the party, the leader of whom is then free to select his cabinet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hayfield

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
4,324
7,867
670
I don't really follow Labour that much anymore, but she did swear on TV about it, which is pretty unprofessional of a Labour MP (unless she is an Ex MP now?)

Did she go Woke then?
Not that so much, more that she really hates poor people and thinks they’re all thick. Also she has a very short fuse.
 

Turnt

Member
Jul 21, 2018
303
424
275
Yep, that was a really dumb comment you were replying to. In the US, you vote directly for your leader. In the UK and its derived democracies like Canada and Australia, you vote for the party, the leader of whom is then free to select his cabinet.
I never said he couldn’t since obviously he has. I just think it’s another example of the peerage system being an incredibly flawed one. Much like the EU’s system is. Someone becoming a peer for life because they happen to be useful in a particular moment isn’t a good way for things to be done. People get them just for being who donors to whichever party is in power. It’s a fucked system that needs reformed. This just happened to be one of the more obvious recent examples of it being used for political gain.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Stilton Disco
Dec 25, 2018
2,634
2,254
715
Manchester, England
Not that so much, more that she really hates poor people and thinks they’re all thick. Also she has a very short fuse.
Careful what you say or else she will sue you for even saying that! :LOL:

She looks posh though....and I just saw on the news that an Ex-Labour MP is blaming Corbyn for losing her seat and wants an apology because "Theresa May did so on all her lost MPs".

Wow....entitlement in the Labour Party is showing its teeth more.
 

Jmarshall

Member
Mar 28, 2018
190
230
280
I don't really follow Labour that much anymore, but she did swear on TV about it, which is pretty unprofessional of a Labour MP (unless she is an Ex MP now?)

Did she go Woke then?
Thornberry is an MP who posts pictures of her constituents who have England flags raised on their properties and then mocks it. Because apparently having your country's flag on display is laughable.

She's also the daughter of a rich barrister and married to lord, but pretends to be from a "single parent family", because her rich parents broke up when she was a child.
 
Dec 25, 2018
2,634
2,254
715
Manchester, England
Thornberry is an MP who posts pictures of her constituents who have England flags raised on their properties and then mocks it. Because apparently having your country's flag on display is laughable.

She's also the daughter of a rich barrister and married to lord, but pretends to be from a "single parent family", because her rich parents broke up when she was a child.
Damn...never expected all that information, but thanks for showing me this.

She isn't patriotic and shames others for it, and is also more Tory than Labour!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stilton Disco

Breakage

Member
Mar 3, 2014
6,935
4,457
565
So another 69 “migrants” crossed the Channel and have entered the UK illegally. Millions of British taxpayer money has been given to the French in regard to this problem. The illegals will likely end up staying and this has been happening for years under a conservative government that claims it cares about bringing immigration down. What happened to Priti Patel's 72 hour ultimatum?:



Brits have short memories.I don't believe that the British government is powerless and can't do anything about this problem. It's a choice. Other European countries have learned to say “no”.

It's another example of how this government has managed to bullshit its way into power.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Stilton Disco

Stilton Disco

Member
Aug 22, 2014
5,141
2,337
640
England
So another 69 “migrants” crossed the Channel and have entered the UK illegally. Millions of British taxpayer money has been given to the French in regard to this problem. The illegals will likely end up staying and this has been happening for years under a conservative government that claims it cares about bringing immigration down. What happened to Priti Patel's 72 hour ultimatum?:



Brits have short memories.I don't believe that the British government is powerless and can't do anything about this problem. It's a choice. Other European countries have learned to say “no”.

It's another example of how this government has managed to bullshit its way into power.
You're not wrong, but it's also not something that could be stopped while we're tied to the EU without tanking the economy.

Most of our GDP comes from London and big cities and those are what need to constantly be fed an unskilled disposable workforce.

The Tories were just voted in by a landslide of people rejecting this globalist, urban centric philosophy. It's in their best intetests to let the cities go hang without the EU to justify their need for immigrants, while sorting out jobs and infrastructure for the neglected rest of the country.

Brexit will fuck our economy up, and the aftermath of that will be the perfect time to crack down on immigration since it wouldn't actually be doing anything to make matters worse, would be an easy thing for them to point to and say 'look, we're protecting British jobs!', thus placating the masses a while, while they invest elsewhere and sort out the trade deals.

They'll probably fuck it up mind, but there's a reason anti EU and anti migration goes hand in hand.
 

funkygunther

Member
Dec 22, 2018
469
352
315
Obviously now the Tories have to prove that they're not just the same-old-shit government of the last 10 years. Johnson has already said that immigrants crossing the channel illegally will be sent back, despite only like 6% of them actually being deported last year. If illegal immigration is such a hot topic for the electorate then I hope to see some action.
 

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
4,324
7,867
670
Here's something I've posted elsewhere (not gaf - thus it had to be watered down a little!).

Strap in, this is going to be a long one. You might want to grab a cup of tea. I'm going to go in-depth on how the left abandoned the working class, and how the Tories won the election by becoming the party of the workers (even adopting left-wing language by referring to the People's Government).

As a kid my parents were staunchly Labour, and naturally it followed that I was the same. The nasty Tories screwing the workers every possible way, trying to privatise the NHS, underfunding schools, stopping people's benefits, cutting funding more in Labour areas than Tory ones, and these things were broadly true. And I took that into adulthood and have for the vast majority of my life been a Labour supporter.

A while ago on a local Facebook group there was a conversation about politics and an old bloke who seemed to be working class said he could never vote for those I'm-alright-jack socialists. Of course I had to educate him, because after all if anyone is I'm alright Jack it's the Tories right? I'm not sure I'd have patronised him that way now.

This is the first election ever where I wanted the Tories to win, and where I live that put me in a minority. Here people assume that everyone is Labour or Green, everyone thinks the same right? It means that every conversation starts from the assumption that the left position is the correct position. It means that people here are hugely out of touch with the rest of the country.

The electoral map is a sea of blue in England with small patches of red around London, Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle, Bristol and Brighton. So how did that happen? How did working class voters in former mining towns, the post-industrial north destroyed by Thatcher, constituencies that had been Labour for nearly 100 years, turn Tory in such huge swings? Why are those red cities so far out of step with the rest of the country? What happened?

It's easy to just say it's Brexit, or that it's Corbyn being useless. Both contributed no doubt, but they're both symptoms of the same wider malaise within left wing politics. That malaise could best be summed up by Emily Thornberry remarking to a Labour colleague that she was glad her voters weren't as stupid as those of said colleague. Emily Thornberry is from a very upper class background. Much of the Labour activist base is achingly middle class. Momentum is middle class.

Just watch Ophelia the left-wing activist enraged at the stupid working classes to see an example of why this is bad. This hatred of the working class runs deep within the Labour Party, and where hatred isn't there we have good old fashioned pity and condescension. We're too thick to know what we're doing and that's why we vote the wrong way.

The public had managed to not realise the extent of this problem, even after seeing the middle class hordes singing "oh Jeremy Corbyn" at Glastonbury, clad in mud-speckled wellies. At the last election Labour made headway during the campaign and ran the Tories close (though one could easily argue the Tory campaign was so poor as to make Labour's failure to win a massive massive defeat - it was presented as a youthquake, a victory for left wing politics).

In the intervening time we've seen the far left become emboldened. The public has been given a taste of what the far left has to offer, having not really had experience of it in the UK, having not even had a sniff of socialism in power since the 70s. That was best exemplified by the efforts of Extinction Rebellion, with its totem, the spokeschild you daren't question lest you be accused of bullying a child (I'll come back to this). Extinction Rebellion (who are surely misnamed, Extortion Rebellion fits far better) have sought to hold cities hostage by clogging up the streets with boats towed by diesel-power belching out fumes as they decry the rest of us for daring to use our cars. They have held up ambulances, tried to stop trains and generally been an enormous nuisance. At each and every rally we see the symbols of the far left - flags for the Socialist Workers Party, the ironically named Antifa who could be argued to be the far left's klansmen, and a load of achingly middle-class white trust fund kids patronising us, telling us they're doing it for our own good (a running theme - they don't like democracy), that if we disagree it's just because we're too stupid to understand, and unwilling to accept that as the UK cuts its impact on the environment China and India massively increase theirs, so perhaps we're not the country to protest.

All through this the environmentalists have sought to attack the working classes, because that's how the middle class operates now. In Bristol they are planning to ban diesel cars from the city centre, rendering thousands of cars useless to their owners who in many cases can't afford to replace them, and ironically causing enormous waste which will do nothing good for the environment. They'll charge buses and taxis for polluting, and of course this will result in increased bus fares which will hit the poor hardest. Finally, all this demands that nobody seeks to improve their lot because they'll end up impacting on the environment more. Destroying the aspirations of the working class is hardly a way to win friends and influence people, especially when you're making it harder for them to get to work, making their day long and unpleasant with irritating protests that do nothing more than virtue signal, tweeting videos of themselves from their iPhones made by Chinese slaves.

Hatred of the working class runs through everything that's wrong with the left. It expresses itself in Brexit, where just as Hillary called her opponents deplorable, the remainers (and Labour are mostly remainers - remain does seem to have become a default left wing position despite history showing that wanting to be outside the EU isn't an exclusively right wing position, many in the party held that view in the 70s and early 80s - most notably Tony Benn and Corbyn himself). It is assumed that if you vote for Brexit it's because you're a thick racist. I voted for Brexit so thanks for that.

So why did people vote for Brexit? Well, I think the main reason is that the bottom rung of the employment ladder got pulled up from the working classes, trapping them in benefit dependency. As cheap labour flooded the country, business became addicted to it, and certain sectors now basically exclude native British people because they've become sufficiently dominated by Eastern Europeans that the lingua franca is no longer English. Try to find a McDonalds, Starbucks or Subway with a majority of British native staff and you'll have quite a search on your hands. Cleaners are almost exclusively Eastern European. Try finding a native English speaker on a building site. On the plus side the middle classes get a cheap latte, get a cheap cleaner, get their building work done cheap, but for the poor it's left them without that emergency job when times are hard and things have gone wrong, the job that gets them started on the ladder. To be clear I don't blame Eastern Europeans for taking the opportunities presented to them, but free movement has placed a lot of competition in the lower end of the employment market. It has depressed wages, while also adding to demand in the lower end of the rental sector. So the poor are struggling to get out of the benefit trap and even if they do are paid poverty wages, and can't afford to rent anywhere. This is not a sustainable path, and the working classes are seeing that the dividends of EU membership are not going to them.

The left has refused to see this, while the likes of Farage saw it and took full advantage. What this has resulted in is a complete recalibration of politics in the UK with the right talking to the working class as friends while the left spits bile and hate, and that's how you end up with the Labour Party losing so many seats, wiped out in huge swathes of the UK (they already lost Scotland for similar reasons) and retreating to university towns and big cities. It's a narrow base that will never get them elected. Now we see them throwing tantrums in the streets, much like what happened in America, which only serves to make people hate them even more, because nobody likes a sore loser. Can we really trust a group of people who won't accept when they've lost, resort to court action to delay and frustrate efforts to implement the results of a national referendum? How can we trust them to respect democracy if they gain power? With the entryism of Momentum a model, copied in the game and movie industries, can we trust them not to stuff the civil service full of their acolytes, ready to render any interruption to socialism a mere temporary inconvenience even if it is the will of the people? Can we trust the side that manipulates an autistic spokeschild to do their bidding, acting as a human shield behind which a multitude of evils can hide, knowing that any criticism of the ideas can be hand-waved as bullying a child who is merely parroting the words of her handlers?

The left currently cannot be trusted, and I fear it will be a long time til I can return. The guy who bemoaned the I'm alright Jack socialists - turned out he was absolutely right. If I could find him I'd apologise for being a patronising shit.
 
Last edited:

AV

Member
May 31, 2018
3,260
6,387
605
Leeds, UK
Here's something I've posted elsewhere.
Great post. The YouGov post-election poll speaks volumes, especially the education level.





We're told time and time again that Labour is "for the working man", "for the everyman", when it's simply not true, and now we have evidence to support it. They're for, more than anyone, University graduates. Graduates who are more often than not from well-to-do middle class families who have a higher chance of going to University, and while there, are often afforded the advantage of being able to study while not having to maintain a job at the same time thanks to mummy and daddy.

Now look, there's nothing wrong with coming from a bit of money and using it to help you get a good education. Nothing wrong at all. But this myth about Labour being for the everymen needs to end. The UK has showed that, by and large, the everymen reject the far-left progressive politics that are most prevalent on university campuses. These are the same kids you saw who could afford the hundreds and hundreds of pounds it costs to go to Glastonbury with their friends and chant for Jezza, who they assume is their mate and not just another politician looking for votes wherever he can get them. The same kids who attend green protests with their energy-burning devices glued to their hands, causing more damage to the environment by diverting traffic and police resources. The same kids who have nothing else to do all day but sit on Twitter talking to other people with nothing to do about how shitty the country is, creating the insane leftie bubble that they inhabit and subsequently being shocked to discover that real life is nothing like their online fantasy.

I'm like you Haris, though I'm only 27 I had voted Labour at every given opportunity before. Not this time.
 

Breakage

Member
Mar 3, 2014
6,935
4,457
565
You're not wrong, but it's also not something that could be stopped while we're tied to the EU without tanking the economy.

Most of our GDP comes from London and big cities and those are what need to constantly be fed an unskilled disposable workforce.

The Tories were just voted in by a landslide of people rejecting this globalist, urban centric philosophy. It's in their best intetests to let the cities go hang without the EU to justify their need for immigrants, while sorting out jobs and infrastructure for the neglected rest of the country.

Brexit will fuck our economy up, and the aftermath of that will be the perfect time to crack down on immigration since it wouldn't actually be doing anything to make matters worse, would be an easy thing for them to point to and say 'look, we're protecting British jobs!', thus placating the masses a while, while they invest elsewhere and sort out the trade deals.

They'll probably fuck it up mind, but there's a reason anti EU and anti migration goes hand in hand.
But these people are entering the UK illegally. And most end up staying – out of the ~1,700 migrants who have crossed this year only 105 have been deported. They're coming from places such as Iran and Iraq. Who knows what kind of backgrounds these people have? (See the failed Parsons Green Tube bomber). The government can be robust about it, but it chooses not to, just like it chooses not to properly enforce the 3-month rule in regard to EU immigration. Non-EU migration continues to run at 200k despite the Conservatives repeatedly saying the numbers will come down. If the housing “crisis” was genuinely concerning, surely the first thing you'd do is stop adding 200k people to the population every year.

The government can't blame the EU for that figure. They keep talking about taking back control as if they can't do anything in regard to immigration until we're out of the EU but that's not true.
They keep peddling the same bs about how they'll bring the numbers down, how they''ll get more stricter, and voters keep eating it up. It's all an illusion. This latest Channel crossing was reported as an “interception”. 69 migrants were “intercepted”. It conjures up an image of a special forces unit picking them up and stopping them from entering. The truth is they were brought to shore and now England will be their permanent home.
This compassionate attitude helps the people smugglers and thus encourages them to carry on, but the educated elites in power don't mind.
Who cares if a few dangerous people like the 18-year-old Iraqi “refugee” who attempted to blow up a Tube train manage to slip through? It won't be MPs or their family and friends who end up paying the price.

What has happened as a result of Priti Patel's tough-sounding ultimatum? Nothing.
They are all just a bunch of charlatans who are able to repeatedly get away with pretending to solve problems.

The so-called “Conservatives” are nothing more than an alternative leftwing party.
 

Stilton Disco

Member
Aug 22, 2014
5,141
2,337
640
England
But these people are entering the UK illegally. And most end up staying – out of the ~1,700 migrants who have crossed this year only 105 have been deported. They're coming from places such as Iran and Iraq. Who knows what kind of backgrounds these people have? (See the failed Parsons Green Tube bomber). The government can be robust about it, but it chooses not to, just like it chooses not to properly enforce the 3-month rule in regard to EU immigration. Non-EU migration continues to run at 200k despite the Conservatives repeatedly saying the numbers will come down. If the housing “crisis” was genuinely concerning, surely the first thing you'd do is stop adding 200k people to the population every year.

The government can't blame the EU for that figure. They keep talking about taking back control as if they can't do anything in regard to immigration until we're out of the EU but that's not true.
They keep peddling the same bs about how they'll bring the numbers down, how they''ll get more stricter, and voters keep eating it up. It's all an illusion. This latest Channel crossing was reported as an “interception”. 69 migrants were “intercepted”. It conjures up an image of a special forces unit picking them up and stopping them from entering. The truth is they were brought to shore and now England will be their permanent home.
This compassionate attitude helps the people smugglers and thus encourages them to carry on, but the educated elites in power don't mind.
Who cares if a few dangerous people like the 18-year-old Iraqi “refugee” who attempted to blow up a Tube train manage to slip through? It won't be MPs or their family and friends who end up paying the price.

What has happened as a result of Priti Patel's tough-sounding ultimatum? Nothing.
They are all just a bunch of charlatans who are able to repeatedly get away with pretending to solve problems.

The so-called “Conservatives” are nothing more than an alternative leftwing party.
I’m not disagreeing, border enforcement has been shite for years, and there’s no guarantee it will change.

But it was shit because that was beneficial to the economy, particularly London and other such now irrecoverably Labour voting areas that provided so much to the GDP, that will be adversely badly hit by Brexit, losing their power and thus removing the reason the Tories turned a blind eye to immigration up until now.

There’s no guarantee or even likelihood that things will change, but if it’s ever going to, post Brexit would be the time, because only then would there would be zero drawbacks in it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Breakage
Mar 14, 2018
313
432
285
lol Thornberry. Labour lost the working class. What it needs most is a woman with a very public SEETHING contempt for the working class.

I think the left is in for a long death spiral because they literally *cannot* stop the runaway 'momentum' (teehee) of the hardcore ideology within their side.

Trying to block Brexit and impeach trump are evidently backfiring spectacularly, but they have no other option because their hardcore base will be furious if they don't press ahead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hariseldon