The British Politics Thread - The Bear and Badger

Yossarian

Diluted Dante wrote:

Well, he was an MEP at that point.

My mistake.

davyK

Yossarian wrote:

Well, he was an MEP at that point.

My mistake.

Why did you not see that in my post?? Maybe I stealth edited.

davyK

From wikipedia

In February 2005, Griffin was asked to take part in a debate on multiculturalism at the University_of_St_Andrews in Scotland. He was invited by the president of the students' debating society, who said "We believe that the only way to get the truth of what the BNP are saying and to combat them is to do it in public in a debate." The move was attacked by anti-racist groups, some of whom refused to participate in the discussion. Griffin said "I am coming up because I was invited by the students at the university because they have a debate on an intelligent subject on which I have something to say. The people against it are the usual bunch of people who cannot win the argument and refuse to stand on a platform.

Not facing down liars and knaves with the truth is how we got into the mess we are in right now.

Yossarian

davyK wrote:

Yossarian wrote:

Well, he was an MEP at that point.

My mistake.

Why did you not see that in my post?? Maybe I stealth edited.

Apologies, I slept terribly last night.

handsofblue

There's a discernable difference between facing down and platforming. It's an invisible line that you will be shouted at for walking, no matter how you walk it as everyone's line on it looks different.

It depends I suppose on the intention. Is the questionable person being given a platform to preach? Or is the point to turn the individual away from their way of thinking? And is there a risk of doing the former by trying to do the latter?

Yossarian

davyK wrote:

From wikipedia

In February 2005, Griffin was asked to take part in a debate on multiculturalism at the University_of_St_Andrews in Scotland. He was invited by the president of the students' debating society, who said "We believe that the only way to get the truth of what the BNP are saying and to combat them is to do it in public in a debate." The move was attacked by anti-racist groups, some of whom refused to participate in the discussion. Griffin said "I am coming up because I was invited by the students at the university because they have a debate on an intelligent subject on which I have something to say. The people against it are the usual bunch of people who cannot win the argument and refuse to stand on a platform.

Not facing down liars and knaves with the truth is how we got into the mess we are in right now.

The problem is that by engaging with these people, you offer them a veneer of respectability and provide a signal that these ideas are up for debate, which is exactly what the racists and fascists want. They may lose individual debates, but it still spreads their message and gains them new followers.

We don’t invite proponents of paedophilia on to QT to face down their ideas with the truth, do we?

davyK

@Yossarian - I think I did stealth edit... no probs.

davyK

Yossarian wrote:

davyK wrote:

From wikipedia In February 2005, Griffin was asked to take part in a debate on multiculturalism at the University_of_St_Andrews in Scotland. He was invited by the president of the students' debating society, who said "We believe that the only way to get the truth of what the BNP are saying and to combat them is to do it in public in a debate." The move was attacked by anti-racist groups, some of whom refused to participate in the discussion. Griffin said "I am coming up because I was invited by the students at the university because they have a debate on an intelligent subject on which I have something to say. The people against it are the usual bunch of people who cannot win the argument and refuse to stand on a platform. Not facing down liars and knaves with the truth is how we got into the mess we are in right now.

The problem is that by engaging with these people, you offer them a veneer of respectability and provide a signal that these ideas are up for debate, which is exactly what the racists and fascists want. They may lose individual debates, but it still spreads their message and gains them new followers. We don’t invite proponents of paedophilia on to QT to face down their ideas with the truth, do we?

I get what you are saying (and @handsofblue). It's a tricky old nut. But ignoring people we considered fools like Trump and Johnson have , through lies, got to to the top. We need a mechanism to face that down. It's probably not a good parallel with the BNP but wacky positions can sometimes become a real threat.

Yossarian

We didn’t ignore Trump or Johnson. The media loved Trump in the early days because he got them ratings, Johnson was in the media and spouting off in newspaper columns for years.

davyK

Yeah - spouting lies. With no way of trampling them down. Never faced down.

I doubt anyone took Trump seriously, least of all the Republican party. But the US is even more broken that we are.

Nasty lies left unchecked. Both demagogues. If we have learned anything of late it is to stamp it out before it grows.

b0r1s

I think Krishnan can be a bit of an arse sometimes but he pulled no punches with BoJo here. When he flat out asked him about getting a job for Carrie I nearly spat my coffee out.

davyK

I am so sick of the sight of that fuckers' face and blonde wig.

Yossarian

davyK wrote:

Yeah - spouting lies. With no way of trampling them down. Never faced down.

I doubt anyone took Trump seriously, least of all the Republican party. But the US is even more broken that we are.

Nasty lies left unchecked. Both demagogues. If we have learned anything of late it is to stamp it out before it grows.

Surely if Trump has proven anything, it’s the ineffectiveness of trying to push back against lies. How many fact checks were produced about his claims? How many lists of lies he told in public? None of it mattered, because by the time any of it was released to the public, Trump had already produced another dozen lies plus an additional controversy or two that was sucking all of the air out of the media environment.

davyK

Yossarian wrote:

davyK wrote:

Yeah - spouting lies. With no way of trampling them down. Never faced down. I doubt anyone took Trump seriously, least of all the Republican party. But the US is even more broken that we are. Nasty lies left unchecked. Both demagogues. If we have learned anything of late it is to stamp it out before it grows.

Surely if Trump has proven anything, it’s the ineffectiveness of trying to push back against lies. How many fact checks were produced about his claims? How many lists of lies he told in public? None of it mattered, because by the time any of it was released to the public, Trump had already produced another dozen lies plus an additional controversy or two that was sucking all of the air out of the media environment.

Your are right. A new way of dealing with these types of people is needed and quickly. It's very difficult thing to deal with when you presume decency. If you keep throwing shit into the air it seems to work. It comes back to my hobby horse of education. Smart people don't fall for it. We need more of 'em.

poprock

Ruling just in on the legality of the Gov’s ‘VIP lane’ for Covid PPE procurement …

It’s been judged unlawful. Finally.

https://goodlawproject.org/update/high-court-vip-lane-ppe-unlawful/

Bit of disappointment on the side though, with the judge deciding that the amount of money wasted can be kept secret.

monkey

davyK wrote:

From wikipedia

In February 2005, Griffin was asked to take part in a debate on multiculturalism at the University_of_St_Andrews in Scotland. He was invited by the president of the students' debating society, who said "We believe that the only way to get the truth of what the BNP are saying and to combat them is to do it in public in a debate." The move was attacked by anti-racist groups, some of whom refused to participate in the discussion. Griffin said "I am coming up because I was invited by the students at the university because they have a debate on an intelligent subject on which I have something to say. The people against it are the usual bunch of people who cannot win the argument and refuse to stand on a platform.

Not facing down liars and knaves with the truth is how we got into the mess we are in right now.

A huge chunk of the past 20-30 years in Britain can be explained as a series of powerful dickheads allowing lies to fester or making them up for their own self-interest, leading to a bigger dickhead coming along and allowing or making up bigger lies.

Escape

It's looking like another Tory-LD coalition at the minute, with Labour losing votes but regaining a few Northern seats due to the cost of living. My seat was yellow until 2015, and I think there's a fair chance of a return as our Tory surge runs out of steam. Which of England's three main political parties is NOT led by a sir...

If the LDs would just bin Davey for Moran on a PR run, I'd give her a small chance of honouring it in their coalition negs. She probably wouldn't, but there's zero hope with Keir Buggins. And things will only get worse if he's booted for Streeting.

Yossarian

Escape wrote:

It's looking like another Tory-LD coalition at the minute.

No it’s not. Not by any current measure.

It may be your feeling that this is what’s going to end up happening, it may indeed yet end up happening, but there’s little reason to think that the current polling and these recent election makes that the most likely outcome.

monkey

Alternate universe opinion.

monkey

It’s looking like [spins wheel] Nicola Sturgeon will [spins wheel] become Boris Johnson’s new [spins wheel] dog.

Diluted Dante

It's looking like Manchester United will dominate the Premier League next season, with Arsenal close behind.

Rev

Escape wrote:

It's looking like another Tory-LD coalition at the minute, with Labour losing votes but regaining a few Northern seats due to the cost of living. My seat was yellow until 2015, and I think there's a fair chance of a return as our Tory surge runs out of steam.

I really get lost in your line of thought sometimes chap. Last night was a hugely positive result that if replicated could spell the end of the Tories as a functioning party for generations. I don't consider them the Tory party anyway. They're currently EDL and BNP in a post trench coat.

Escape

They're where the BNP were 20 years ago, more or less, with Labour now covering the Tories' ground in that era.

If history repeats we're only a couple of decades from a return to this point with no mainstream option to its left. This Labour's a respite package, and even then swings to the right of current Tories on winter payments.

Labour might pull bigger numbers than I expect in the North, but save Exeter they've never been popular south of Bristol, so I'd bet good money on an LD surge here. It'll be interesting to see their next manifestos, because I sense the LDs coming out to the left of Labour again.

The version of Labour that, when the banking crisis happened, voted to attack benefits claimants with horrific sanctions while leaving the bankers alone.

monkey

https://twitter.com/gabriel_pogrund/status/1540744716437770240?s=21&t=16EgB9G5Ftp5WHn3EouSbQ

Prince Charles accepted a suitcase containing €1m in cash from "HBJ", the former prime minister of Qatar

Charles received three €1m gifts from sheikh in undisclosed meetings - including one said to be in Fortnum & Mason bags

Just the future King of the Britons there, taking grubby cash payments in secret meetings.

Diluted Dante

Fuck Labour and fuck David Lammy.

monkey

A “serious government” would assess an industrial dispute on its particulars instead of steaming in with knee-jerk absolutism.

RedDave2

monkey wrote:

A serious government would assess an industrial dispute on its particulars instead of steaming in with knee-jerk absolutism.

Yeah, but isn't the whole point of voting in a goverment that you agree with their ideologies and you want those as the guiding ones in goverment activities? The Civil Service of Government provides the consistency but the politics provides the (for want of a better term) the flavours? Would have thought a party named labour and built on the concept of representing the workers in a nation would be able to claim that while they are all for negotiation above disruption they would by and large take the side of the general workforce.

If they want to take the side against the heathrow staff because they think it is unwarrented then fair enough and they should say why but to claim its because they want to show they can be serious government, I'm not sure its helping their cause. Isnt the Torie Lite option already represented by the Lib Dems?

RedDave2

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/26/labour-has-now-claimed-the-centre-ground-and-has-shown-it-can-win

Pretty certain this is the rallying call all you socialists needed...

b0r1s

If he’s basing this on the By Election results this week he’s a fucking idiot. The idea that Wakefield and Tiverton were a fundamental shift in voter behaviour above giving the Tories a bloody nose is misguided at best.

JonB

RedDave2 wrote:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/26/labour-has-now-claimed-the-centre-ground-and-has-shown-it-can-win Pretty certain this is the rallying call all you socialists needed...

Hell yeah. It should certainly rally socialists. Just not around the Labour party.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories