British Politics
Been on holiday for a few weeks, surprised to find no general discussion of British politics so though I'd kick one off.
Tory leadership contest is quickly turning into farce. Trump has backed Boris, which should be reason enough for anyone with half a brain to exclude him.
Of the other candidates Rory Stewart looks the best of the outsiders. Surprised to see Cleverly and Javid not further up the betting, but not sure the Tory membership are ready for a brown PM.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri...
Regarding the LD leadership contest, Jo Swinson is miles ahead of any other candidate (and indeed any of the Tory lot). Should be a shoe in.
Finally, it's Groundhog Day in Labour - the more serious the anti-Semitism claims get, the more Corbyn's cronies write their own obituary by blaming it on outlandish conspiracy theories - this week, it's apparently the Jewish Embassy's fault...
Westminster goss
The latest madness from plotters scheming to oust Rishi Sunak after 2 May’s local elections is to persuade Boris Johnson to endorse Priti Patel – Liz Truss then piles in and, hey presto, the former home secretary is miraculously installed as prime minister to popular acclaim.
Sunak is pleading with his No 10 team to stick with him rather than quit now while still employable. Talk around Downing Street is that he’s privately promising to look after them following the almost inevitable defeat. Nobody buys Sunak’s denials. They all think he’s contemplating life after politics.
Arrived home to find an election leaflet, with the union flag on the front and back cover. At first glance I assumed it was from whichever white power party is currently popular, but it turns out it's from Labour.
The hate crime reports are known to be the result of a campaign by people to report alleged anti-white offences in protest at the law which they feel restricts their right to racially abuse people.
Would anti white speech be persecuted under the act? Because there is plenty in a lot of currently popular books, does the act address books as well?
LONDON — The right-wing political party set up by U.K. Brexiteer Nigel Farage has apologized after publicly firing one of its election candidates for being “inactive” — when the candidate had in fact died.
Reform UK admitted it didn’t realize that Tommy ****well, its election candidate in York Central, had perished when he was sacked for lack of activity.
“We can’t afford to have people doing nothing in an election year,” a party spokesperson had told local news outlet the York Press.
Labour may fail to grab target seats as young voters turn away over Gaza and climate
Party figures say decision to tack to right on issues such as immigration could also diminish predicted landslide
Labour risks losing in a number of its target seats as previously loyal progressive voters turn away from the party, senior party figures and polling experts have warned.
Experts said Keir Starmer’s party could struggle to win as many as a dozen of its key targets, and could even lose two of the seats it now holds, as a result of alienating some Muslims and younger progressive voters angered by its stance on Gaza and the climate crisis.
...
The decision by Starmer, the Labour leader, to tack to the right on issues such as the economy, immigration and the environment has helped win over older white voters who backed Brexit at the referendum.
But those decisions have also upset many traditional Labour voters in urban areas in particular. Among those voters’ chief concerns is the party’s decision to abandon its commitment to spend £28bn a year on green projects and Starmer’s defence of Israel’s military actions in Gaza.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/202...
The pressure will tell eventually if we dont waste our votes by letting them take us for granted.
If the young are turned off labour cos climate, I'm starting to feel better about humanity. Hope KS reinstates those climate commitments.
Has even the Daily Mail had enough of the tories? I'm kind of shocked.
Probably some sort of reader bait and switch medium/long play.
This is the most famous I guess
There are paragraphs in that book where if you change "white" with "black" and you said that in public you would be arrested in many European countries.
Even the title would create you a lot of legal troubles if it was "black" instead of whites
"Black fragility: why understanding there is no racism might be so hard for black people"-> are you sure this would be legally allowed in Scotland?
False equivalences like this ignore the diametrically opposed histories of black and white people.
Can you cite some of the paragraphs you've referred to?
This is the most famous I guess
There are paragraphs in that book where if you change "white" with "black" and you said that in public you would be arrested in many European countries.
Even the title would create you a lot of legal troubles if it was "black" instead of whites
"Black fragility: why understanding there is no racism might be so hard for black people"-> are you sure this would be legally allowed in Scotland?
Robin DiAngelo isn't in Scotland. Obviously that kind of neurotic elitist white American 'anti-racism' is in itself racist, since it attempts to seize and dictate the debate on behalf of the white governing class. (Like 'colour-blind casting' in films and TV, where black and Asian actors are humiliatingly and patronisingly and tokenistically hired to play white characters in order to suit a neurotic US agenda whose spores have unfortunately blown across the Atlantic.) But as a rule, in white-majority countries, racism against white people, unless on a very personal basis, is considered trivial because the overall power-structure doesn't support it. The US, of course, is only a white-majority country due to colonial settlement, the slave plantation system and the dispossession of the indigenous nations. This accounts for US white-liberal paranoid lunacy and is why those ideas shouldn't come over here -- although, because of idiots at the BBC and in universities and elsewhere, they often do. Britain, whatever mischief it once got up to overseas, is a white-majority country because this is Northern Europe and Britons are the aboriginal rootstock population since the last Ice Age ended 10,000 years ago.
Seemingly Police Scotland received a number of complaints against the First Minister for racism against white people. These appear to have been dismissed, but a properly defined law would not be open to that kind of thing, since a properly defined law would address objective harm and not a subjective sense of offence. As for Scottish politicians saying it's entirely up to the police to decide what the law means -- that's a somewhat unsurprising derogation of duty on the part of Scottish politicians.
Robin DiAngelo isn't in Scotland. Obviously that kind of neurotic elitist white American 'anti-racism' is in itself racist, since it attempts to seize and dictate the debate on behalf of the white governing class. (Like 'colour-blind casting' in films and TV, where black and Asian actors are humiliatingly and patronisingly and tokenistically hired to play white characters in order to suit a neurotic US agenda whose spores have unfortunately blown across the Atlantic.) But as a rule, in white-maj
The book is though, I was asking if the book itself can be banned under the new Scottish rules.
Btw in the USA people are starting to win court cases about discrimination on the job place because they are white, so things aren't so obvious
watching some 2019 election coverage reruns. the most striking thing is how much of a mess labour was in
keir has played his hand very skillfully
"Luciom you are strawmanning about a purported academic takeover of Marxists in the west"
Glasgow neo elected chief of university: Hasta la victoria sempre (fist up)
Ridiculous. One might as well say that US academia is becoming overrun by far right wing academics and post a Peterson video as support.
Oh wait, that's the person you're actually copying. What a coincidence.
Ridiculous. One might as well say that US academia is becoming overrun by far right wing academics and post a Peterson video as support.
Oh wait, that's the person you're actually copying. What a coincidence.
If the head of a college in the USA said "hail hitler" at their inaugurational speech , YES , you could? or any other white supremacist official slogan.
"hasta la victoria siempre" is a very famous phrase by a very famous marxist terrorist, is that controversial? the totality of people in academia shouldn't just avoid using it, they should actively fight it as one of the worst evil in human history.
Or not, but then don't lie when i say marxism is prominent in academia, accepted, glorified.
Don't lie by calling Guevara a terrorist.
What lie? That icon of marxist was a bloody terrorist, one of the leaders (behind only Castro) of the terrorist groups who usurped power violently in Cuba and installed a bloody regime after that.
I know that you guys on the left consider revolutionaries some kind of heroes, they are still terrorists.
And even if you disagree with the label, Che is one of the most iconic marxists in the world, so the topic of "marxism at the top echelon of academia" still stands. We are now after the phase of "it didn't happen" to the phase of "it happened and it's good", according to you.
I know how you screechy hysterical far right types love to exaggerate but overthrowing a puppet regime isn't the definition of terrorism, which if you gave it a moment's thought you'd realise does require terror among the population to be present. Astonishing how words work isn't it.
Stop lying.
I know how you screechy hysterical far right types love to exaggerate but overthrowing a puppet regime isn't the definition of terrorism, which if you gave it a moment's thought you'd realise does require terror among the population to be present. Astonishing how words work isn't it.
Stop lying.
Deflection much? even under the leftist label of "revolutionary leader", still a marxist.
Citing him in an inaugural speech, is still marxism.
And marxism should have absolutely no place in colleges, as it is one of the most heinous ideologies ever developed in the history of the world.
Previously , when i said academic settings were rife with marxism, you denied that and said that was a fake narrative invented by peterson or whatever.
Now, when a college elects a leader which is an actual marxist, you only talk about the fact that you dislike that i consider a marxist "hero", a terrorist.
Do you admit that a person going with "hasta la victoria siempre" at his inaugural speech shouldn't exist in any institution in civil society? that it is a monstrous event, a disgusting thing we should all fight actively against? that marxism is fully incompatible with liberal democracy? that marxism is evil and should be eradicated? and that is is DOMINANT IN MANY COLLEGES which you previously denied?
Lots of shrieking but not a single attempt to justify the "terrorist" label you used for effect, completely inaccurately as usual.
And not a single attempt to justify the "terrorist" label you used for effect, completely inaccurately as usual.
why? you disagree, there is no way to prove/disprove as it is a subjective evaluation, why waste more time on it?
While the palestinian guy being marxist is objectively true given the "hasta la victoria siempre" (with raised fist) speech.
And of course you can't comment on that because you would need to start saying that actually, you don't dislike actual marxism at the head of civil institutions.
