Be Excellent To Each Other
https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/

Political Banter and Debate Thread
https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10024
Page 7 of 288

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 11:21 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Saturnalian wrote:
Bamba wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
A sad indictment of modern politics life that appearance counts for so much.


Feex.


That's what an uggo would say, aye, aye? AMIRITE beautiful people? Hello? Hello...





ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
Only joking, kids. Being superficial is morally wrong*.


ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
*said some uggo.


:DD

Author:  Anonymous X [ Thu May 29, 2014 11:23 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
The Greens are simply too radical (in both political and pragmatic terms) for most.

They're slowly moving towards being a 'sensible' Green Party as in Germany or France or wherever, but not far enough to be considered mass appeal by many. Plus FPTP, well, zero chance of a breakthrough with that as our default voting system, natch.

Author:  MrC [ Thu May 29, 2014 11:46 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
Saturnalian wrote:
Bamba wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
A sad indictment of modern politics life that appearance counts for so much.


Feex.


That's what an uggo would say, aye, aye? AMIRITE beautiful people? Hello? Hello...





ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
Only joking, kids. Being superficial is morally wrong*.


ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
*said some uggo.


:DD



I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.

Author:  Satsuma [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:07 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Whoa! It was just a flippant silly remark, not a torrent of abusive bullying directed at anyone. I thought we did that here sometimes. Christ knows I'm hideously repulsive.

Author:  Bamba [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:25 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

MrC wrote:
I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.


This is PC gone mad, we need to apply some common sense here.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:46 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

MrC wrote:
Cavey wrote:
Saturnalian wrote:
Bamba wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
A sad indictment of modern politics life that appearance counts for so much.


Feex.


That's what an uggo would say, aye, aye? AMIRITE beautiful people? Hello? Hello...





ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
Only joking, kids. Being superficial is morally wrong*.


ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
*said some uggo.


:DD



I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.


I do apologise, I really, really did not mean it like that. :(

(Cripes, I'm no oil painting that's for sure! I hate bullying and prejudice in all it's forms, in fact I *abhor* it, but honestly, this was just harmless japes/fun)

Author:  MaliA [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:49 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
MrC wrote:
Cavey wrote:
Saturnalian wrote:
Bamba wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
A sad indictment of modern politics life that appearance counts for so much.


Feex.


That's what an uggo would say, aye, aye? AMIRITE beautiful people? Hello? Hello...





ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
Only joking, kids. Being superficial is morally wrong*.


ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
*said some uggo.


:DD



I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.


I do apologise, I really, really did not mean it like that. :(

(Cripes, I'm no oil painting that's for sure! I hate bullying and prejudice in all it's forms, in fact I *abhor* it, but honestly, this was just harmless japes/fun)


If my dog looked like you, I'd shave its arse and make it walk backwards.

Author:  markg [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:50 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

It definitely would then.

Author:  MaliA [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:51 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Bamba wrote:
MrC wrote:
I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.


This is PC gone mad, we need to apply some common sense here.


Bravo.

Author:  Grim... [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:53 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Let's not make (new) jokes at the expense of someone's dead friend / someone telling us about their dead friend / etc, folks.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:55 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Trooper wrote:
I think if there was a party that was truly inclusive and positive on all points, and didn't try to fuck anyone over, the non-voters would turn up in their droves and it would be a landslide.


But isn't that, essentially, the LibDems?

I'm a Tory (well, sort of - kind of a relic from the 40s/50s; "Patrician Tories" like me don't really exist anymore), but that's why I voted LD at the last GE. Classical Tory economic thinking figures heavily in all of my political opinions and beliefs, but even I tire of seeing the downtrodden get downtrodden even more EVEN IF the mean population net benefits. For me, it's Tory Head vs. Liberal Heart - and with me, Heart almost invariably wins out in the end.

But did people vote for them & their egalitarian Manifesto in their droves? Sadly not, albeit just about enough to at least deliver a junior governmental role, upon which all of us are (IMO) reaping considerable benefits, most especially those less fortunate.

Author:  MaliA [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:55 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Moving on:

Joey Barton on Question Time. The fuck? Is everyone else on holiday?

Author:  KovacsC [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:56 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

All the blokes on Beex are batting above our average :)

Author:  MaliA [ Thu May 29, 2014 12:57 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
Trooper wrote:
I think if there was a party that was truly inclusive and positive on all points, and didn't try to fuck anyone over, the non-voters would turn up in their droves and it would be a landslide.


But isn't that, essentially, the LibDems?


I think that the LibDems were esssentially a protest vote party and oculd say whatever the mood took them to and then they found themselves in power and got found out that they're not so cuddly after all and lots of people were surprised by how right of centre they actually were.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:01 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

MaliA wrote:
Cavey wrote:
Trooper wrote:
I think if there was a party that was truly inclusive and positive on all points, and didn't try to fuck anyone over, the non-voters would turn up in their droves and it would be a landslide.


But isn't that, essentially, the LibDems?


I think that the LibDems were esssentially a protest vote party and oculd say whatever the mood took them to and then they found themselves in power and got found out that they're not so cuddly after all and lots of people were surprised by how right of centre they actually were.


But they HAD to be "right of centre" on many things, being as they were (very much) a minority partner within a Tory-led coalition government? This is, of course, how coalitions work: the two parties were far from equal and the Tories COULD have formed a minority government.

From where I'm sitting, key LD influences like income tax reductions for the low paid, increases (albeit small) in unemployment benefits and a more Keynsian approach to encouraging the economic recovery (that the Tories will take full credit for) don't look very "right of centre" to me, and all the better for it.

Author:  MrC [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:03 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
MrC wrote:
Cavey wrote:
Saturnalian wrote:
Bamba wrote:
Curiosity wrote:
A sad indictment of modern politics life that appearance counts for so much.


Feex.


That's what an uggo would say, aye, aye? AMIRITE beautiful people? Hello? Hello...





ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
Only joking, kids. Being superficial is morally wrong*.


ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
*said some uggo.


:DD



I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.


I do apologise, I really, really did not mean it like that. :(

(Cripes, I'm no oil painting that's for sure! I hate bullying and prejudice in all it's forms, in fact I *abhor* it, but honestly, this was just harmless japes/fun)



Fair enough squire, you seem like a decent enough chap. I probably shouldn't have even mentioned it, but it still hurts to think about it even now. People can be such cunts.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:04 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

MaliA wrote:
Moving on:

Joey Barton on Question Time. The fuck? Is everyone else on holiday?


Isn't he that violent footballer bloke? Wtf...?
The BBC annoys me. Just think of all the people they could've got on the panel; prominent business people or those giving sterling public service, yet they get him on, presumably to generate a bit of controversy and interest. Bah.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:05 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

MrC wrote:
Fair enough squire, you seem like a decent enough chap. I probably shouldn't have even mentioned it, but it still hurts to think about it even now. People can be such cunts.


Thanks mate, I really appreciate that and my apologies once again for offence caused. :)

Cavey

Author:  markg [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:23 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
Trooper wrote:
I think if there was a party that was truly inclusive and positive on all points, and didn't try to fuck anyone over, the non-voters would turn up in their droves and it would be a landslide.


But isn't that, essentially, the LibDems?

I'm a Tory (well, sort of - kind of a relic from the 40s/50s; "Patrician Tories" like me don't really exist anymore), but that's why I voted LD at the last GE. Classical Tory economic thinking figures heavily in all of my political opinions and beliefs, but even I tire of seeing the downtrodden get downtrodden even more EVEN IF the mean population net benefits.

That's just it though. Things seem to be getting shittier for a lot people with each passing generation. Nobody talks about any noble concepts any more. Things like social mobility, I don't remember the last time I heard a Prime Minister or opposition leader try to make a serious issue out of that. What do we get instead? Fucking Big Society nonsense, wages so shit that working people are often unable to make ends meet, the poor and the sick being painted as worthless scroungers who we should no longer even bother to veil our contempt for. They could run the economy however the fuck they like for all I care but eventually people have to recognise that a truly decent society only comes around because it looks after the least fortunate and that costs money. People are more than just economic units to be ruthlessly exploited to the maximum extent.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... r-children

I'd love to vote for a party who said that there would be tough times ahead but that their end game is a fair society which promotes equality. All the Tory party have to offer is basically "tough shit, there is no other way, the rich must always get richer". It's going to lead to ruin and I'm never voting for that.

Author:  MaliA [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:36 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
MaliA wrote:
Moving on:

Joey Barton on Question Time. The fuck? Is everyone else on holiday?


Isn't he that violent footballer bloke? Wtf...?
The BBC annoys me. Just think of all the people they could've got on the panel; prominent business people or those giving sterling public service, yet they get him on, presumably to generate a bit of controversy and interest. Bah.


Him, Piers Moron and some lass from UKIP. Not really heavy hitters.

EDIT:
If it were me, I'd have Ken Clarke, Alistair Campbell and John Prescott on every week as although i don't often agree with them, what they do have to say and the arguments and points they make are very interesting.

Author:  Kern [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:51 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Piers Moron makes me even less likely to watch QT than normal. And not just because I'm still holding a grudge against Dimbleby for not picking me when I was 17.

But, it is always refreshing to hear a thoughtful politician talk about what they believe or how they think society should be, even if you disagree with them.

Author:  Trooper [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:53 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Kern wrote:
And not just because I'm still holding a grudge against Dimbleby for not picking me when I was 17.



Have you contacted Operation Yewtree?

Author:  Anonymous X [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:55 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

MaliA wrote:
I think that the LibDems were esssentially a protest vote party and oculd say whatever the mood took them to and then they found themselves in power and got found out that they're not so cuddly after all and lots of people were surprised by how right of centre they actually were.

Dead on, exactly. The LibDems may be to the left of most European liberal parties and were better on civil liberties issues than the other two, but they were hardly this left-leaning party they were in popular (mis)conception.

Author:  KovacsC [ Thu May 29, 2014 13:57 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Trooper wrote:
Kern wrote:
And not just because I'm still holding a grudge against Dimbleby for not picking me when I was 17.



Have you contacted Operation Yewtree?


:DD

Author:  Kern [ Thu May 29, 2014 14:05 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Until I just googled him, I had no idea who Mr Barton was. I wish I could say the same about Mr Moron.

Author:  MaliA [ Thu May 29, 2014 14:07 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Kern wrote:
But, it is always refreshing to hear a thoughtful politician talk about what they believe or how they think society should be, even if you disagree with them.


Recently, there was a program on R4 in the morning briniging together people on opposite sides of the Miner's strike. Clarke did a very good job of expalining the decisions and discussions behind the governments actions. He seems quite a reasonable person, but I think most politicians that have been lawyers tend to be better at speaking than others.

Author:  MaliA [ Thu May 29, 2014 14:07 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Kern wrote:
Until I just googled him, I had no idea who Mr Barton was. I wish I could say the same about Mr Moron.


He was at the Union recently.

Author:  Kern [ Thu May 29, 2014 14:33 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Given I'm still in Oxford, I really ought to keep an eye on their programme and remember to attend things. Seems I've missed a number of interesting people over the last few years (excluding, of course, the ones who have recently pulled out of speaking due to recent events that are sub judice). Still glad I never got involved in Union politics though.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 14:39 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

MaliA wrote:
If it were me, I'd have Ken Clarke, Alistair Campbell and John Prescott on every week as although i don't often agree with them, what they do have to say and the arguments and points they make are very interesting.


Ken Clarke? Agreed, totally.
John Prescott though? Seriously, I just think that guy's a lamentable buffoon; a total idiot gob-on-a-stick? No wonder he's mercilessly lampooned? (Better than Campbell though; I'm afraid that guy makes my very flesh crawl and I seriously doubt I could share the same air with him in a room. Nuff said on that score).

I should add that I'm not being politically partisan here; there are plenty of people I could listen to all day whose views often diametrically oppose my own - the late Tony Benn and Dame Shirley Williams are two that spring instantly to mind. (I loved "The Benn [diary] Tapes" that R4 did some years back; a fascinating insight)

Author:  MaliA [ Thu May 29, 2014 14:54 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

I think JP is under estimated.
Campbell's take on things is interesting, as is his blog.

like you and Kern, I like a decently put, well structured argument, even if the other side is totally wrong.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 15:36 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

markg wrote:
That's just it though. Things seem to be getting shittier for a lot people with each passing generation.


I know what you mean - and actually agree with you - but we must remember that actually, it is NOT the case that things (i.e. living standards, disposable income, access to luxury goods etc.) are getting shittier across the generations. Actually the reverse is (broadly) true?

Recalling my childhood from the mid-70s through to the early-80s, my parents' generation basically, inarguably did not have it anywhere near as good as people of mine, and your generation. My old man worked all hours (and by that I mean 60hrs+/week; we hardly saw him as kids), slaving away as a toolmaker (a HUGELY skilled job with 7 year apprenticeship; he proudly wore his shirt and tie on the shop floor and was massively respected). My mum worked full time also, in an electronics factory (among other places), yet the five of us were crammed into a very modest (heavily mortgaged) semi in Clacton; he drove a 20 year old Austin 1100 which took whatever spare time he had in home maintenance and welding (as the thing was dissolving before our very eyes), and my mum (and we) got the bus. We had one rented Bush TV set in the house, an old school spin dryer and a washing machine that was at least 10 years old, went on ONE holiday (to Great Yarmouth) in my ENTIRE childhood and adolescence combined. I still remember the wonderment and awe when my mum was able to buy a microwave. I mean like, can you seriously imagine this now?

What IS true to say is that the gulf between rich and poor has got greater (much greater, both under Tory and most especially New Labour administrations), which is actually what I think you're alluding to here. However, even the 'poor' - and most especially those of average means - ARE better off than they were.

Quote:
Nobody talks about any noble concepts any more. Things like social mobility, I don't remember the last time I heard a Prime Minister or opposition leader try to make a serious issue out of that. What do we get instead? Fucking Big Society nonsense,


Again, I agree. I'm not saying this to piss you off, but the last PM I heard discussing these big ideals/concepts was Thatcher - one way or another, be it the sale of council houses, deregulation of the mortgage market, removal of the closed shop, low taxation - she freed the working classes such as my dad and his family to aim far, far higher than they could ever have dreamt (or been 'permitted' to do), empowering and enriching them. Sure, she did not get everything right, far from it (the legacy of insufficient housing stock, most notably council housing, is all too evident), but the ideals, political ideology, objectives and deliberate execution of those big ideas were all there. With seismic results. Does anyone seriously think someone like me could've done what I have managed to do, if I was living in the 60s or 70s? I'd be where I started, in a factory somewhere, in a council house, earning a pittance with no realistic prospect or incentive for self-improvement.

Today's media-friendly "career politicians" lack that essential raw energy, vision and objective, which is one of the reasons why Farage has (wrongly imo) totally captured the public's imagination. We instinctively - and finally - rail against the 'me too' politically correct, consensus, media-driven politicians of today who dare not say "the wrong thing", who've never had a real job, who don't really seem to believe in anything much, besides themselves. For me, New Labour were the absolute epitome of this, and we've gone on from there. Cameron bears many similarities to Blair.

Quote:
wages so shit that working people are often unable to make ends meet,


Agreed; "something" needs to be done about the Living Wage. Why should the likes of Tesco or whoever be allowed to hire people in the middle of London @ £7/hour, with the UK taxpayer picking up a huge tab in Tax Credits? I don't pay my taxes to subsidise the likes of them paying low salaries!

The question as to what to do about it is a thorny one though, for sure.

Quote:
the poor and the sick being painted as worthless scroungers who we should no longer even bother to veil our contempt for.


Agreed, but I'm sorry, I want to differentiate between genuinely poor, disadvantaged, ill and/or disabled people (or people who are genuinely trying, but failing, to improve their lot) - upon which no decent person would not sympathise, and want to do something about their plight - and people who are not "ill" in any meaningful sense of the word (at least not too ill to contribute something useful to our society), or just plain lazy. Apologies, but we must acknowledge there are people like this, and plenty of them.

Author:  MrC [ Thu May 29, 2014 16:09 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Bamba wrote:
MrC wrote:
I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.


This is PC gone mad, we need to apply some common sense here.



Bamba, I don't want to be a massive bore here, but can you explain to me what you meant with that comment? Maybe you were joking when you dug out the old PC gone mad thing, what I was on about is you don't kick someone when they're down. It's not about being able to take a joke, it's about endless repetition of the same thing again and again over years, nothing to do with common sense or political correctness, that sort of thing can drive you to distraction and more eventually. It's about common courtesy and decency and generally not getting a kick out of making other people feel bad.

Author:  Grim... [ Thu May 29, 2014 16:17 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

It's a cross-thread "joke" - if you haven't read the relevant thread today (I think it was B&B, not sure) then it looks like he meant it, which I'm sure he didn't.

[edit]Ah, here it is: viewtopic.php?p=822900#p822900

Author:  Bamba [ Thu May 29, 2014 16:33 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

MrC wrote:
Bamba wrote:
MrC wrote:
I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.


This is PC gone mad, we need to apply some common sense here.



Bamba, I don't want to be a massive bore here, but can you explain to me what you meant with that comment? Maybe you were joking when you dug out the old PC gone mad thing, what I was on about is you don't kick someone when they're down. It's not about being able to take a joke, it's about endless repetition of the same thing again and again over years, nothing to do with common sense or political correctness, that sort of thing can drive you to distraction and more eventually. It's about common courtesy and decency and generally not getting a kick out of making other people feel bad.


Grim's explained it; I thought my original post he references was made in this thread so my subsequent comment would make sense in situ but I was obviously mistaken there.

Also, as I hope you realise, none of the stuff you list there (endless repetition, kicking someone when they're down, getting a kick out of making other people feel bad, etc) or anything like it was actually happening here. It's essential that context is taken into account whenever someone makes a joke about anything and in this context, with respect, I think you're over-reacting and giving poor Saturnalian a hard time over nothing. Cue: someone shouting at me for even saying anything in the hallowed halls of the politics thread.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 16:37 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Bamba wrote:
Cue: someone shouting at me for even saying anything in the hallowed halls of the politics thread.


..."Hallowed halls"? Surely you jest!
This is nowt more than a place for Beexers to (very loosely) chew the political chat, with hopefully some funny stuff, japes and even the odd barney or two to keep things amusing and interesting, but not to be taken seriously. None of the stuff I do is.

Author:  MrC [ Thu May 29, 2014 17:19 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Bamba wrote:
MrC wrote:
Bamba wrote:
MrC wrote:
I think you'll find that's less amusing than you think - I know someone who was driven to suicide by neverending hilarious "uggo" comments over a period of many years. No different to racism etc in my opinion.


This is PC gone mad, we need to apply some common sense here.



Bamba, I don't want to be a massive bore here, but can you explain to me what you meant with that comment? Maybe you were joking when you dug out the old PC gone mad thing, what I was on about is you don't kick someone when they're down. It's not about being able to take a joke, it's about endless repetition of the same thing again and again over years, nothing to do with common sense or political correctness, that sort of thing can drive you to distraction and more eventually. It's about common courtesy and decency and generally not getting a kick out of making other people feel bad.


Grim's explained it; I thought my original post he references was made in this thread so my subsequent comment would make sense in situ but I was obviously mistaken there.

Also, as I hope you realise, none of the stuff you list there (endless repetition, kicking someone when they're down, getting a kick out of making other people feel bad, etc) or anything like it was actually happening here. It's essential that context is taken into account whenever someone makes a joke about anything and in this context, with respect, I think you're over-reacting and giving poor Saturnalian a hard time over nothing. Cue: someone shouting at me for even saying anything in the hallowed halls of the politics thread.





Um, bit of a misunderstanding there, I think. The kicking when down and endless repetition weren't about anything on the forum, it was about what happened in real life with real life consequences. I wasn't bashing you or Saturnalian at all, the "uggo" comments just reminded me of what can happen in real life when these things are taken too far. As such, I suppose you could at a pinch call it an overreaction on my part. It simply made me sad to think of that subject again, sorry about that. Pretty sure Cavey got what I was trying to say, bloody annoying having a nice Tory around the place gnawing at your prejudices :D

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 17:53 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Some interesting stuff on Wiki about Patrician (One Nation) Conservatism and its origins:

Quote:
One-nation conservatism was first conceived by the Conservative British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli,[4] who presented his political philosophy in two novels – Sybil, Or The Two Nations and Coningsby – published in 1845 and 1844 respectively.[5][6] Disraeli's conservatism proposed a paternalistic society with the social classes intact but with the working class receiving support from the establishment. He emphasised the importance of social obligation rather than the individualism that pervaded his society.[4] Disraeli warned that Britain would become divided into two 'nations', of the rich and poor, as a result of increased industrialisation and inequality.[5] Concerned at this division, he supported measures to improve the lives of the people to provide social support and protect the working classes.[4]

Disraeli justified his ideas by his belief in an organic society in which the different classes have natural obligations to one another.[4] He saw society as naturally hierarchical and emphasised the obligation of those at the top to those below. This was based in the feudal concept of noblesse oblige, which asserted that the aristocracy had an obligation to be generous and honourable; to Disraeli, this implied that government should be paternalistic.[5] Unlike the New Right, one-nation conservatism takes a pragmatic and non-ideological approach to politics and accepts the need for flexible policies; one-nation conservatives have often sought compromise with their ideological opponents for the sake of social stability.[7] Disraeli justified his views pragmatically by arguing that, should the ruling class become indifferent to the suffering of the people, society would become unstable and social revolution would become a possibility.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-nation_conservatism

Wise words indeed from history, in my opinion at least.

Author:  Cavey [ Thu May 29, 2014 23:39 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Joey Barton, QT, and his "four ugly birds" analogy.... :facepalm: :belm:

Man, it was excruciating

Author:  Pundabaya [ Thu May 29, 2014 23:54 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Wait, they let Barton talk? I thought he was there solely to lamp Piers Morgan.

The whole 'employment' thing is a thorny issue. Full employment is a thing of the past (unless you go the Soviet route of bullshit jobs) so, what do you do with the people who can't get jobs but are willing to work, or the people who don't want to work. You could almost say the lazy fucks on Benefit Street are actually performing a social function by deliberately taking themself out of the jobs market.

The 'Tesco pays bullshit wages' thing, well the government will always allow them to get away with it, because if you made them pay a living wage, they'd cut staff right to the minimum, and that would fuck up the employment figures. (Three people doing 16 hours a week for fuck all topped up by tax credits = three employed people. One person doing 40 hours a week at a decent wage= one employed person. Amount of actual work done = the same.)

Author:  markg [ Fri May 30, 2014 0:11 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Pundabaya wrote:
Wait, they let Barton talk? I thought he was there solely to lamp Piers Morgan.

The whole 'employment' thing is a thorny issue. Full employment is a thing of the past (unless you go the Soviet route of bullshit jobs) so, what do you do with the people who can't get jobs but are willing to work, or the people who don't want to work. You could almost say the lazy fucks on Benefit Street are actually performing a social function by deliberately taking themself out of the jobs market.

The 'Tesco pays bullshit wages' thing, well the government will always allow them to get away with it, because if you made them pay a living wage, they'd cut staff right to the minimum, and that would fuck up the employment figures. (Three people doing 16 hours a week for fuck all topped up by tax credits = three employed people. One person doing 40 hours a week at a decent wage= one employed person. Amount of actual work done = the same.)

Surely that's just the same bullshit about how bringing in a minimum wage was going to destroy millions of jobs.

Author:  MaliA [ Fri May 30, 2014 9:08 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
Joey Barton, QT, and his "four ugly birds" analogy.... :facepalm: :belm:

Man, it was excruciating


Comedic football tea time email thinks the same as all 1,057 of us.

Quote:
As is well known, Joey Barton has occasionally struggled to contain his anger in the past – indeed, you could say that on a few regrettable occasions his anger has overpowered him, nutted him in the face, kneed him in the danglers or stubbed a cigar out in his eye – but the midfielder has manfully faced up to his issue, albeit after being manfully sent down for it, and he now appears to be a changing man.


The QPR shuffler has won admiration for striving to overcome thuggish tendencies and for engaging in discussions on a wide range of topics on Twitter and elsewhere. And when people disagree with him online or point out inconsistencies in his reasoning, he does not resort to physical violence, instead preferring a more sophisticated reaction, perhaps involving the deployment of words such as ‘muppet’, ‘helmet’ or ‘beIIend’ or a spot of metaphorical wad-waving. Barton is a shameless attention-seeker and it is his luck to exist in times where attention seekers always get what they want – including an invitation to appear on the BBC’s flagship current affairs debate programme, Question Time.


Yes, amid a full-blown housing crisis in Britain, a “political earthquake” across Europe and escalating conflict in Ukraine, the Central African Republic and Nigeria, the BBC has decided that the best way to deepen public understanding of the major issues of the day is to ask Barton to share the expertise that he has managed to amass on these matters in between launching free-kicks in the general direction of Charlie Austin. The Fiver has no beef with Barton being allowed to express his views on whatever he fancies – he could be more honest than many politicians, but we would quite like the BBC to come right out and admit that Question Time is just another reality TV show, where the point is not to pursue enlightenment but to provide entertainment through cringes. Then again, you could argue that the corporation has basically done that by announcing that Barton’s fellow panellists tonight will be Jordan, a lemur who does a hilarious Noel Edmonds impression after a few drinks, and Piers Morgan. OK, that last one was just a ridiculous exaggeration for comedic effect.


Author:  Pod [ Fri May 30, 2014 11:02 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Cavey wrote:
My old man worked all hours (and by that I mean 60hrs+/week; we hardly saw him as kids), slaving away as a toolmaker (a HUGELY skilled job with 7 year apprenticeship; he proudly wore his shirt and tie on the shop floor and was massively respected).


A tie in a workshop? Sounds dangerous.

Quote:
Agreed, but I'm sorry, I want to differentiate between genuinely poor, disadvantaged, ill and/or disabled people (or people who are genuinely trying, but failing, to improve their lot) - upon which no decent person would not sympathise, and want to do something about their plight - and people who are not "ill" in any meaningful sense of the word (at least not too ill to contribute something useful to our society), or just plain lazy. Apologies, but we must acknowledge there are people like this, and plenty of them.


Pundabaya wrote:
Wait, they let Barton talk? I thought he was there solely to lamp Piers Morgan.

The whole 'employment' thing is a thorny issue. Full employment is a thing of the past (unless you go the Soviet route of bullshit jobs) so, what do you do with the people who can't get jobs but are willing to work, or the people who don't want to work. You could almost say the lazy fucks on Benefit Street are actually performing a social function by deliberately taking themself out of the jobs market.

The 'Tesco pays bullshit wages' thing, well the government will always allow them to get away with it, because if you made them pay a living wage, they'd cut staff right to the minimum, and that would fuck up the employment figures. (Three people doing 16 hours a week for fuck all topped up by tax credits = three employed people. One person doing 40 hours a week at a decent wage= one employed person. Amount of actual work done = the same.)


I don't think you can avoid lazy people. Most utopian ideas always fall in the face of 'lazy people', and we're talking "sit around doing nothing" lazy rather than "become an artist rather than a bricky" lazy here. I think most people want to work, or at least *do something*, i.e. create stuff. Even in a world full of automation and robots that do every back breaking job, allowing people to sit on their bums, I imagine most people won't. I suspect they'd find things "to do" with their time which, on the whole, would probably benefit society. But there's always a few people content to do absolutely nothing, and I think any form of society needs to recognise that and just work around them.

I would suggest some kind of social ostracisation, but that seems a step too far along the "why not just shoot them?!" route.

Author:  Trooper [ Fri May 30, 2014 11:07 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

I work incredibly hard at being lazy, it doesn't come naturally for me, but it's a skill I've learned over the years and i'm now extremely proficient at it...

Author:  Curiosity [ Fri May 30, 2014 11:15 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Trooper wrote:
I work incredibly hard at being lazy, it doesn't come naturally for me, but it's a skill I've learned over the years and i'm now extremely proficient at it...


Y'see, I was born with it. I guess I was just lucky.

Author:  Doctor Glyndwr [ Fri May 30, 2014 12:11 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Pod wrote:
A tie in a workshop? Sounds dangerous.

You wear clip-ons, that will come loose of they get caught. (My grandfather also moved into management in a workshop...)

Author:  asfish [ Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:30 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

According to the Mail this morning, they need to spend 4 Billion on the houses of parliament to stop it falling down.

As its the Mail I guess the figure is probably closer to 1 Billion

Wonder which brave party will be willing to try and get this spending approved!

Author:  Doctor Glyndwr [ Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:31 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

asfish wrote:
According to the Mail
I'm going to stop you there.

Author:  asfish [ Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:39 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
asfish wrote:
According to the Mail
I'm going to stop you there.


:DD

My sister in law hates the right but loves reading the Mail Online due to the huge number of bullshit celebrity articles!

I remember years ago being in Paris Airport in the BA lounge where of course the Mail is free. A US guy I was with couldn't understand the paper as it started with right wing semi serious political stuff and by the time you get to the middle its got stuff about Big Foot or a secret code in the Bible spelling the end of the world

Author:  Kern [ Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:47 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

I've heard reports from other sources that Parliament is in a serious state of disrepair (eg BBC, 2012).

EDIT Link to their own site: http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-h ... n-project/

Author:  asfish [ Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:59 ]
Post subject:  Re: Political Banter and Debate Thread

Kern wrote:
I've heard reports from other sources that Parliament is in a serious state of disrepair (eg BBC, 2012).

EDIT Link to their own site: http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-h ... n-project/



BBC are saying the cost will be 3 Billion so the Mail wasn't that far off!

Page 7 of 288 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/