• 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.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

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

Doc Honk

Member
Oct 21, 2014
1,902
1,625
760
Noob question here GAF, sorry, but this is the best place I think I can ask it. Forgive me O all-knowing Keyboard Warriors. What exactly is privatisation and why is it seen as a bad thing?

So, recently we've heard Corbyn talk about the NHS being sold to Trump, and ever since I can remember the media have complained about the privatisation of services and infrastructure. Then today, I was listening to an audiobook about the Nazis and how they were for state ownership and welfare, and then I saw on FB the guy who set up the NHS is praised, and we love the NHS right? Is the answer a bit of both, or should it be 100% one way or the other, or you got any suggestions for books so I can educate myself on the matter sooner than later lol cheers sorry
 

ROMhack

Member
Jul 14, 2018
2,983
3,094
700
Noob question here GAF, sorry, but this is the best place I think I can ask it. Forgive me O all-knowing Keyboard Warriors. What exactly is privatisation and why is it seen as a bad thing?

So, recently we've heard Corbyn talk about the NHS being sold to Trump, and ever since I can remember the media have complained about the privatisation of services and infrastructure. Then today, I was listening to an audiobook about the Nazis and how they were for state ownership and welfare, and then I saw on FB the guy who set up the NHS is praised, and we love the NHS right? Is the answer a bit of both, or should it be 100% one way or the other, or you got any suggestions for books so I can educate myself on the matter sooner than later lol cheers sorry
Well, I guess the difference there is that they were the Nazis and had strong policies like invading and annexing Austria and Poland, and then, you know, getting a bit dominant about territory in general...

The privatisation issue exists because healthcare is free and seen as a public good in the UK. At a base level, your average person doesn't earn enough to pay for it directly. Our wages are lower than in the USA so it would have some big repercussions if we were asked to pay expenses suddenly. You can, of course, pay for private healthcare if you wish, but the base level is there to support society. IMHO it's a good thing and the only reason we're having the debate is because we haven't been funding it enough to keep up with demand. It's an issue that boils over into immigration and perhaps generally with the dilemma of having a low-wage economy (not applicable for me personally tbh but definitely for some).

Privatisation isn't always an issue, though. People tend to look at the trains as an example where it worked. In the 1980s the trains were operated by National Rail (a public service). They weren't maintained well so were privatised and various companies picked up regional services. Now they work quite well — even though they're always late — but because they're private, they have shareholders to appease, which means higher prices year-on-year. In the government's hands this (presumably) would be less of an issue and the money would go back to society rather than DeutscheBahn and Abellio, which are owned by private/public companies based in the Netherlands and Germany.

Basically, a lot of issues with privatisation come down to the idea it was a good short term solution. As the cost of things increased, though, wages didn't keep up well enough to compensate. Therefore we've got into a situation where people are paying high prices for housing and travel, which are seen as basic commodities. Labour's solution is iffy but seems to suggest, hey this is a bit shit isn't it. We sold a lot of state-owned industries to private companies but it isn't sustainable.

The NHS is the newest battleground.

Books? Not sure. This is just stuff I've picked up over the years.

Disclaimer: I'm no expert, nor do I pretend to be. Happy to be corrected if any of this is incorrect,
 
Last edited:

Doc Honk

Member
Oct 21, 2014
1,902
1,625
760
Well, I guess the difference there is that they were the Nazis and had strong policies like invading and annexing Austria and Poland, and then, you know, getting a bit dominant about territory in general...

The privatisation issue exists because healthcare is free and seen as a public good in the UK. At a base level, your average person doesn't earn enough to pay for it directly. Our wages are lower than in the USA so it would have some big repercussions if we were asked to pay expenses suddenly. You can, of course, pay for private healthcare if you wish, but the base level is there to support society. IMHO it's a good thing and the only reason we're having the debate is because we haven't been funding it enough to keep up with demand. It's an issue that boils over into immigration and perhaps generally with the dilemma of having a low-wage economy (not applicable for me personally tbh but definitely for some).

Privatisation isn't always an issue, though. People tend to look at the trains as an example where it worked. In the 1980s the trains were operated by National Rail (a public service). They weren't maintained well so were privatised and various companies picked up regional services. Now they work quite well — even though they're always late — but because they're private, they have shareholders to appease, which means higher prices year-on-year. In the government's hands this (presumably) would be less of an issue and the money would go back to society rather than DeutscheBahn and Abellio, which are owned by private/public companies based in the Netherlands and Germany.

Basically, a lot of issues with privatisation come down to the idea it was a good short term solution. As the cost of things increased, though, wages didn't keep up well enough to compensate. Therefore we've got into a situation where people are paying high prices for housing and travel, which are seen as basic commodities. Labour's solution is iffy but seems to suggest, hey this is a bit shit isn't it. We sold a lot of state-owned industries to private companies but it isn't sustainable.

The NHS is the newest battleground.

Books? Not sure. This is just stuff I've picked up over the years.

Disclaimer: I'm no expert, nor do I pretend to be. Happy to be corrected if any of this is incorrect,
That's pretty helpful actually, thanks. I'm British so I could vote, but based on current sociopolitical activity I don't want to vote for the commies. Surely giving private ownership of trains back to the government seems a bit drastic, but the NHS being sold is probably scare mongering too. Control immigration is a better answer if it is them who overburden the system, but who am I kidding innit.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ROMhack

DV27

Formerly 'Dan27'
Jun 14, 2010
11,175
266
890
A combination of Corbyn not appealing and fence sitting on Brexit, and the Conservatives having a deal ready to go to leave the EU are two prominent reasons. the Tories aren't especially strong in most other areas - a large element of their lead is down to the Labour leadership being inept, their hard to swallow fisical policies and all their internal party issues. If Labour had a competant leader and leadership, and a credible Brexit policy, they would be owning Boris right now. Hell, I suspect we wouldnt be having an election at all.

Beyond Brexit, the reason people vote for the Conservatives (and Lib Dems) over Labour is simply because there are so many reasons why you SHOULDNT vote Labour, rather than should vote for those other parties. Labour have barely any feet left in their party after three years of shooting themselves in there on multiple, multiple occassions.
 
Mar 30, 2012
8,743
158
555
I love Labourites trying to spin that they have a clear Brexit policy. They'd renegotiate a different deal? On what basis? To achieve what exactly? Do they want free movement or not? Corbyn won't say.

And then, after whatever fantasy renegotiation they have in mind, Corbyn still won't say whether he'd campaign for Remain or the deal he had just negotiated! Fucking clown world indeed.
 

Hissing Sid

Member
Feb 19, 2015
812
1,314
460
I've just laffed my way through the Labour Party manifesto. Full of Carbon this and Social Justice that. Heavy on buzzwords and light on actual policy detail. Everyone's going to ride around on unicorns and snort pure fairy dust, all paid for with monkey math cash.

It's a fucking joke. But then old Corby knows hardly anyone's going to actually read the thing, so as long as it sounds good and promises lots of free shit it's job done. No doubt he's hoping to just blag it till election day and praying that enough peeps buy into his shit to brave the rain and keep the country in eternal political limbo.
 
Last edited:
Mar 30, 2012
8,743
158
555
Going of those figures the Tories will more or less regain the majority they had after 2015 that May lost in ‘17.
Good news anyway because commie Corbyn won’t be getting the keys to number 10 hopefully they lose a few more seats just so there is no chance he stays on as leader.
And the good news is that ALL the Conservative candidates have been pre-vetted and will vote for Boris' Brexit deal. So even if they only get a majority of 1, that's getting voted though before Christmas. No more saboteurs.

Also, it looks like all of the Tory defectors to the Lib Dems will lose their seats. Bye bye Sam Gyimah!
 

DV27

Formerly 'Dan27'
Jun 14, 2010
11,175
266
890
If those figures are correct complacency is the Conservatives biggest concern right now.
 

Derekloffin

Member
Jun 17, 2013
553
183
465
Noob question here GAF, sorry, but this is the best place I think I can ask it. Forgive me O all-knowing Keyboard Warriors. What exactly is privatisation and why is it seen as a bad thing?

So, recently we've heard Corbyn talk about the NHS being sold to Trump, and ever since I can remember the media have complained about the privatisation of services and infrastructure. Then today, I was listening to an audiobook about the Nazis and how they were for state ownership and welfare, and then I saw on FB the guy who set up the NHS is praised, and we love the NHS right? Is the answer a bit of both, or should it be 100% one way or the other, or you got any suggestions for books so I can educate myself on the matter sooner than later lol cheers sorry
Privatizing is simply the act of moving a government controlled service to private owners.

Is it bad? It can be, but it can also be good. Really depends a lot on the situation.
Things that get natural monopolies tend to be rather bad when in private control (not universally, but can tend that way). Likewise things that become highly redundant can also be bad for the same reason to privatize. Lastly, of course, is the consideration of profit motive. Public corps are often thought to run at or near cost so in theory they feel like they should be cheaper, while a private corp is going to try and get a profit out of it, so again in theory it sounds like they should be more expensive. These problems can be regulated, but that is the main concern, and in the case of the last one often in practice not actually true.
On the other side, keeping something public can also be bad. Public sector stuff, since it has a protected monopoly, tends to slack and become bloated and inefficient. Even if they can stave that off, public sector corps are often at the mercy of the government potentially denying them proper funding, or diverting funds they earn to other areas. This is harder to combat as unfortunately government tends to just bloat over time, and unless you're having revolutions constantly that's not likely to change.
 

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
3,861
6,757
655
Going of those figures the Tories will more or less regain the majority they had after 2015 that May lost in ‘17.
Good news anyway because commie Corbyn won’t be getting the keys to number 10 hopefully they lose a few more seats just so there is no chance he stays on as leader.
The trouble is there’s been a purge of the moderate left in the Labour party, led by Momentum, which has rather drained the talent pool and now all that remains is a collection of extremists. The party is going to be hard to fix.
 

DV27

Formerly 'Dan27'
Jun 14, 2010
11,175
266
890
The trouble is there’s been a purge of the moderate left in the Labour party, led by Momentum, which has rather drained the talent pool and now all that remains is a collection of extremists. The party is going to be hard to fix.
Quoted for pure truth.

As a rule, the vast majority of voters who actually make a difference in elections are on the middle ground of the political spectrum here (note: the political spectrum differs considerably in the UK compared to the US). It is those voters who Tony Blair + New Labour appealed to so many to bring landslide elections starting in 1997, ending 18 years of Conservative rule. It is for those votes that the General Election is essentially decided. The Conservatives and Labour in general each have their core voters.

That centre ground of votes that are up for share, and the views and political leanings of those have been shat on from a great height by the shift by Labour's party members, and Momentum in bringing in Jeremy Corbyn and his far left agenda. Those voters, who Labour need, who they once had in the Labour governments of the late 90s and 2000s, and have demonised because of their political stance, are leaving them - to either to vote Lib Dems, Conservative or even worse, not vote at all. It is those voters who don't drink what Momentum is trying to force feed them to get to vote for Corbyn & Co, like it's somehow your duty to do so. It prompted James O'Brien, one of the more prominent left leaning broadcasters to post this tweet:


The blunt truth is this: With Labour party membership so entrenched by Momentum, even if Corbyn fails massively on the 12th, they'll just replace him with the next hard left Chosen One and we'll be back to the start. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. And that will continue to set the state of politics in this country back decades.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hariseldon
Mar 28, 2017
764
388
325
Sheffield, UK
mixer.com
I love Labourites trying to spin that they have a clear Brexit policy. They'd renegotiate a different deal? On what basis? To achieve what exactly? Do they want free movement or not? Corbyn won't say.

And then, after whatever fantasy renegotiation they have in mind, Corbyn still won't say whether he'd campaign for Remain or the deal he had just negotiated! Fucking clown world indeed.
I remember seeing an interview with Emily Thornberry (lol, her) stating that they would get a new deal and campaign against it to remain...
 

funkygunther

Member
Dec 22, 2018
422
315
305
I remember seeing an interview with Emily Thornberry (lol, her) stating that they would get a new deal and campaign against it to remain...
Corbyn would stay neutral and not campaign, allowing his cabinet to campaign how they'd want. The funny thing is that most of his cabinet are pro-remain. With the strategy of a second ref where your party has voters split its probably best to not campaign at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KormaChameleon
Dec 15, 2011
5,516
12,870
1,090
Can anyone confirm which parties are saying "We'll stop Brexit" or "We'll have another Brexit referendum" as part of their manifesto?

My understanding currently is:

Tories: Proceed with Brexit
Labour: Fuzzy. Not for, not against. Negotiate a deal.
Lib Dems: Stop Brexit
SNP: Proceed with Brexit
Brexit Party: Proceed with Brexit
IG4C: Second Referendum
Green: Second Referendum

Is that accurate?
 
Last edited:

ROMhack

Member
Jul 14, 2018
2,983
3,094
700
In a way it'll be nice for Brexit to get out of the way so people can start debating actual policies instead.

Feels like that's a real issue with UK politics at present. Too much getting swept under the rug.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hariseldon

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
3,861
6,757
655
Can anyone confirm which parties are saying "We'll stop Brexit" or "We'll have another Brexit referendum" as part of their manifesto?

My understanding currently is:

Tories: Proceed with Brexit
Labour: Fuzzy. Not for, not against. Negotiate a deal.
Lib Dems: Stop Brexit
SNP: Proceed with Brexit
Brexit Party: Proceed with Brexit
IG4C: Second Referendum
Green: Second Referendum

Is that accurate?
SNP I think are pretty much voting for anything to prevent Brexit - though they're using Brexit as justification for a 2nd Scottish independence once-in-a-lifetime referendum. Certainly that's how they've behaved in the commons. I would say that the greens and independents, while campaigning for a 2nd referendum, wouldn't be trustworthy if given the chance to word the question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schrödinger's cat

Kazza

Gold Member
Oct 6, 2018
2,234
4,231
570
Can anyone confirm which parties are saying "We'll stop Brexit" or "We'll have another Brexit referendum" as part of their manifesto?

My understanding currently is:

Tories: Proceed with Brexit
Labour: Fuzzy. Not for, not against. Negotiate a deal.
Lib Dems: Stop Brexit
SNP: Proceed with Brexit
Brexit Party: Proceed with Brexit
IG4C: Second Referendum
Green: Second Referendum

Is that accurate?
Not exactly. From my understanding, this is the current situation:

Tories: Proceed with Brexit on current deal
Labour: Two-faced. Want to tell working class supporters in the North they respect the vote, but tell everyone else they want to remain. Will re-negotiate a new deal (pretty much customs union plus single market) and then will campaign in a referendum against their own deal, except Jezza, who will say neutral.
Lib Dems: Unilaterally revoke Brexit without any referendum (although they seem to have been cooling on the idea in recent days)
SNP: Second referendum (both Brexit and Scottish Independence)
Brexit Party: Pro-Brexit, but anti Boris' deal. Want a no deal Brexit (although they seem to be secretly accepting of Boris' deal rather than risk splitting the Brexit vote)
IG4C:

Green: Second Referendum
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schrödinger's cat

Kazza

Gold Member
Oct 6, 2018
2,234
4,231
570
SNP I think are pretty much voting for anything to prevent Brexit - though they're using Brexit as justification for a 2nd Scottish independence once-in-a-lifetime referendum. Certainly that's how they've behaved in the commons. I would say that the greens and independents, while campaigning for a 2nd referendum, wouldn't be trustworthy if given the chance to word the question.
I think preventing Brexit would be a pre-condition to independence, as rUK leaving the customs union and single market makes things much more complicated.
 
Dec 15, 2011
5,516
12,870
1,090
Thanks for the clarification.

For me, this is an important barometer for these parties in this election.
I say this not because I am deeply invested in Brexit, but because I believe in democracy and a general election happens to be a democratic process.

Regardless of how I voted in Brexit, the democratic process resulted in a vote to proceed with Brexit.
Whether I care for the outcome of the vote is one thing. Whether I care for the process is something else - and I care deeply.

So my barometer is: If you are campaigning to ignore the democratically achieved outcome of the Brexit referendum then you are undemocratic.

This isn't ideal for two reasons:
1) You are currently campaign in a general election - which is a democratic process. If you are showing you ignore democratic process then there is a hypocrisy evident in your participation.
2) What will be the next democratically achieved result you ignore? And the next? Where does that lead?

--

Independent Group For Change
 
  • Like
Reactions: hariseldon

Kazza

Gold Member
Oct 6, 2018
2,234
4,231
570
Independent Group For Change
I was only joking, but I think they are pretty much as dead as UKIP (and whoever "PC" are) right now:






I don't really know who he is, but that Glenn Greenwald character really gets around, getting involved in Brazil, the US and now Britain (while still finding time to get in digs at Sam Harris). Impressive energy :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
3,861
6,757
655
I think preventing Brexit would be a pre-condition to independence, as rUK leaving the customs union and single market makes things much more complicated.
Logically yes but politically not so much as it's Brexit that's their main excuse for demanding a second referendum. No Brexit, no reason for a 2nd referendum. Of course you're right that Scotland as an indpendent nation trying to re-enter the EU might find that tricky, but Sturgeon doesn't let little details like that get in the way. It's messy, like all British politics right now.
 

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
3,861
6,757
655
Kazza Kazza PC is Plaid Cymru - think the Welsh version of the SNP. Nationalist weirdos, inflicting the Welsh language on a country that mostly doesn't want to speak Welsh outside of the most utterly depressing areas of far North and West Wales, etc.
 

ROMhack

Member
Jul 14, 2018
2,983
3,094
700
I don't really know who he is
Glenn Greenwald or Tom Harwood?

Glenn is a liberal journalist who worked closely with The Guardian in 2013 during dissemination of the NSA surveillance revelations (e.g. Ed Snowden). He featured in Laura Poitras' film Citizen Four. He's also Jewish.

Tom Harwood is a walking cliche: private school educated, young Tory journalist who happily eats the shit of senior MPs, while looking precisely like a caricature of a privately educated mid-20s Tory advocate. His middle name is Hedley.

They naturally differ in their approaches :)
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: Kazza

DV27

Formerly 'Dan27'
Jun 14, 2010
11,175
266
890
Can anyone confirm which parties are saying "We'll stop Brexit" or "We'll have another Brexit referendum" as part of their manifesto?

My understanding currently is:

Tories: Proceed with Brexit
Labour: Fuzzy. Not for, not against. Negotiate a deal.
Lib Dems: Stop Brexit
SNP: Proceed with Brexit
Brexit Party: Proceed with Brexit
IG4C: Second Referendum
Green: Second Referendum

Is that accurate?
Tories: Proceed with Brexit deal as arranged by the PM ASAP**
Labour: Negotiate their own Brexit deal with the EU, and hold a referendum with their deal vs Remain
Lib Dems: Outright revokation of Article 50 and stay in the EU*
SNP: Outright revokation of Article 50 and stay in the EU
Brexit Party: Leave the EU without a deal**
IG4C: Hold a second referendum but LUL theyre toast
Green: Outright revocation of Article 50 and stay in the EU*
Plaid Cymru: Outright revocation of Article 50 and stay in the EU*


* - are in a strategic partnership not to run in certain constituencies to bolster Pro EU vote
** - Brexit party are in a strategic partnership not to run in Conservative held seats to bolster Conservative vote.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Schrödinger's cat
Mar 28, 2017
764
388
325
Sheffield, UK
mixer.com
Can anyone confirm which parties are saying "We'll stop Brexit" or "We'll have another Brexit referendum" as part of their manifesto?

My understanding currently is:

Tories: Proceed with Brexit
Labour: Fuzzy. Not for, not against. Negotiate a deal.
Lib Dems: Stop Brexit
SNP: Proceed with Brexit
Brexit Party: Proceed with Brexit
IG4C: Second Referendum
Green: Second Referendum

Is that accurate?
Close but SNP is more... proceed with brexit, make Scotland independent and join the EU as Scotland.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Schrödinger's cat

Kazza

Gold Member
Oct 6, 2018
2,234
4,231
570
Logically yes but politically not so much as it's Brexit that's their main excuse for demanding a second referendum. No Brexit, no reason for a 2nd referendum. Of course you're right that Scotland as an indpendent nation trying to re-enter the EU might find that tricky, but Sturgeon doesn't let little details like that get in the way. It's messy, like all British politics right now.
Yeah, it's a bit of a conundrum for the SNP. Imagine if rUK left and Scotland wanted to join (assuming Spain allowed it and that the EU were happy with their debt/currency situation) - that hard border could be tricky.

Glenn Greenwald or Tom Harwood?

Glenn is a liberal journalist who worked closely with The Guardian in 2013 during dissemination of the NSA surveillance revelations (e.g. Ed Snowden). He featured in Laura Poitras' film Citizen Four. He's also Jewish.

Tom Harwood is a walking cliche: private school educated, young Tory journalist who happily eats the shit of senior MPs, while looking precisely like a caricature of a privately educated mid-20s Tory advocate. His middle name is Hedley.

They naturally differ in their approaches :)
Ah, I didn't know of GG's involvment in the whole wikileaks business (I knew the Guardian were involved, but they seemed to sour on the whole thing pretty quickly for some reason).

Someone should tell this Tom fella that all the cool, young privately educated rich kids are joining Corbyn's Labour party these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ROMhack

Gashtronomy

Member
Apr 19, 2019
3,060
4,031
400
Yeah, it's a bit of a conundrum for the SNP. Imagine if rUK left and Scotland wanted to join (assuming Spain allowed it and that the EU were happy with their debt/currency situation) - that hard border could be tricky.
Hadrian's wall already exists.
 

GamingKaiju

Member
Oct 24, 2014
535
402
435
And the good news is that ALL the Conservative candidates have been pre-vetted and will vote for Boris' Brexit deal. So even if they only get a majority of 1, that's getting voted though before Christmas. No more saboteurs.

Also, it looks like all of the Tory defectors to the Lib Dems will lose their seats. Bye bye Sam Gyimah!
Good. HoC has spent wayyy to much time indulged over Europe and the domestic agenda has fallen by the way side. The Brexit uncertainty has damaged us more than actually doing it. Hopefully the libs and Labour get smashed in the election because they have by far been the biggest hold up. I also hope that cuck Chucka loses his seat in Manchester he’s being a massive thorn in the Brexit debate.


The trouble is there’s been a purge of the moderate left in the Labour party, led by Momentum, which has rather drained the talent pool and now all that remains is a collection of extremists. The party is going to be hard to fix.
Momentum are a cult at this point, Labour aren’t even for the working close anymore they stand with the metropolitan elites and don’t care for the blue collar workers. Unless someone within the Party is able to break the grip momentum has over the PLP and restores Labour to its core beliefs than I hope they get wiped out in the next few election cycles. Corbyn stepping down will not change Labour, momentum will just replace him with some other hard leftist, they need to be broken from within I’m hoping they get massively savaged in the election but people will vote Corbyn because he’s not Boris without realising what they’ve let themselves in for.

I was a Labour member but left a couple of years ago when certain high figures within the party started going against Brexit cough cough Thornberry.

The best outcome would be a splinter of Labour into two parties then the momentum types can die off at the next election.
 

ROMhack

Member
Jul 14, 2018
2,983
3,094
700
Good. HoC has spent wayyy to much time indulged over Europe and the domestic agenda has fallen by the way side. The Brexit uncertainty has damaged us more than actually doing it. Hopefully the libs and Labour get smashed in the election because they have by far been the biggest hold up. I also hope that cuck Chucka loses his seat in Manchester he’s being a massive thorn in the Brexit debate.
Definitely. Putting my own feelings aside, the motivation for most leavers I spoke with was to leave the EU to move forward and progress, but all it's done is hinder the country so far. I think of things like the Conservatives not building those 200k starter homes that they promised and the fact that the public forgot about it almost immediately. Homelessness too.
 
Last edited:

autoduelist

Member
Aug 30, 2014
11,033
16,324
855
So I'd definitely encourage history to be taught quite neutrally, without any "we're the greatest" or "we're all horrible" subtext. Simply because I think it benefits everyone much more than any particularly biased view. (unfortunately, most countries aren't very good at this)
Eh. We are the greatest. Look at the atrocities, plagues, famines, droughts of history. Look at what is still going on in parts of the world.

We are damn lucky Western Culture was able to claw itself out of the dregs of history, and create what we have today. We aren't ignorant to our past, we simply accept that our progress wasn't instant.

So 'neutral'? How can a history book be neutral about the atrocities humans have committed? How can they be neutral about our greatest accomplishments? Why would I want them to be neutral about the blood shed to create my country and write the Bill of Rights, or neutral about the blood shed to end slavery, or the blood shed to kill Nazis?

It's okay to be the greatest. Love of our country, love of our neighbor, love of our community is critical to social cohesion and trust. There is no value in hating ourselves, our heritage, our history. And while i know you say 'neutrality' and not 'hate', recognize they come together, like a Trojan horse. Those claiming 'neutrality' are too often the ones who are quick to list the sins of our heroes, to tear down statues, to rewrite history to fit their narratives, to call the American flag and Union Jack 'racist'. Nah. No thanks.

Because if it wasn't our heroes colonizing the world and creating modern civilization, it would be someone else's. And a simple glance around the world should be enough for anyone to realize how lucky the world is that western civilization fought back invasion after invasion, and then set sail to lands unknown. Sure, bad things happened in the process. Of course they did. We're humans.
 
Last edited:

Kazza

Gold Member
Oct 6, 2018
2,234
4,231
570
This is beautiful.




I wonder if the usual Russian conspiracy theorists will acknowledge this, or will they just try to ignore it (seeing as it doesn't damage Brexit or Johnson)?

It seems that some other really clownish shit went down yesterday when Channle 4 and others accused Boris of saying "people of colour" when he clearly said "people of talent". Apparently the phrase in the original (now deleted) clip was (rather suspiciously) unclear, but it sounds clear as day that he said "people of talent" here. Are people really so biased to the point that their own brain twists the information coming from their own ears? Also, isn't "people of colour" the current politically correct phrase anyhow, or has what is ok changed yet again? Shit's confusing!

 
Last edited:

ROMhack

Member
Jul 14, 2018
2,983
3,094
700
It seems that some other really clownish shit went down yesterday when Channle 4 and others accused Boris of saying "people of colour" when he clearly said "people of talent". Apparently the phrase in the original (now deleted) clip was (rather suspiciously) unclear, but it sounds clear as day that he said "people of talent" here. Are people really so biased to the point that their own brain twists the information coming from their own ears? Also, isn't "people of colour" the current politically correct phrase anyhow, or has what is ok changed yet again? Shit's confusing!

Have to preface this by saying I don't like Johnson but...

Yeah, you'd have to be a complete fool to think he'd actually say that. No chance.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KormaChameleon
Mar 28, 2017
764
388
325
Sheffield, UK
mixer.com


I wonder if the usual Russian conspiracy theorists will acknowledge this, or will they just try to ignore it (seeing as it doesn't damage Brexit or Johnson)?

It seems that some other really clownish shit went down yesterday when Channle 4 and others accused Boris of saying "people of colour" when he clearly said "people of talent". Apparently the phrase in the original (now deleted) clip was (rather suspiciously) unclear, but it sounds clear as day that he said "people of talent" here. Are people really so biased to the point that their own brain twists the information coming from their own ears? Also, isn't "people of colour" the current politically correct phrase anyhow, or has what is ok changed yet again? Shit's confusing!

Channel 4 has been heavily biased since the referendum. Glad that they are getting called out on this bullshit.
 
Mar 30, 2012
8,743
158
555
SNP to support minorty labour government

I know we discussed this in the other thread and here is the first to come out in support of a labour-led coalition to stop Brexit and Boris.

It seems your vote across parties may come down to two choices; Labour or Cons, Remain or Brexit.
SNP to support minorty labour government

I know we discussed this in the other thread and here is the first to come out in support of a labour-led coalition to stop Brexit and Boris.

It seems your vote across parties may come down to two choices; Labour or Cons, Remain or Brexit.
I think in 2017 people treated it as a "normal" election. After 2 years of faffing though Leave voters now know that they don't have that luxury.

Hell, the Conservative manifesto could say their domestic policy is for Dominic Raab to personally come to my house and kick me in the nads. I'd still vote for them just to get Brexit over the line at this point.
 

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
3,861
6,757
655
I think in 2017 people treated it as a "normal" election. After 2 years of faffing though Leave voters now know that they don't have that luxury.

Hell, the Conservative manifesto could say their domestic policy is for Dominic Raab to personally come to my house and kick me in the nads. I'd still vote for them just to get Brexit over the line at this point.
How about we get to choose the Tory MP delivering the nad-kicking?
 

DV27

Formerly 'Dan27'
Jun 14, 2010
11,175
266
890
So Jeremy Corbyn's own Shadow Health Secretary's honest opinions have come to light. Yikes.

 

llien

Gold Member
Feb 1, 2017
6,632
3,924
720
...Russian conspiracy theorists...
It doesn't make sense to me, so let me ask as, perhaps, I've misread it.
You are commenting on a post about REDDING admitting Russians are meddling with UK elections, but at the same time, you refer to people who think Russia does try to meddle with elections as conspiracy theorists?