🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
He is a traitorous c*nt
Remember that one of the “reasons” for the Chagos Surrender was that it would “increase our influence and soft power”. Instead everyone has laughed at Starmer and Labour for being such a weak bunch of fucking cucks and now they are demanding the UK pay seven trillion quid and forcing Starmer to sign this communique
WANKERS
He's surely empowered Putin too. How long before Russian tanks are in Sevenoaks because the great big girl's blouse is too scared to use Trident?
Reading some of today’s comments, I’m worried that some on here would prefer Putin to Starmer. I’m thinking I’ve accidentally logged onto Con Home.
It's like we've turned into the cigar room in some Mayfair den in the 70s.
Chaps cussing the reds and working themselves up into a right old lather.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody who can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
Fair point. I'm on board with tilting to that and challenging some shibboleths to make that happen.
But, you have to commit to voting to defeat Labour and the LDs at the next election to bring it about
I am now extremely committed to defeating the Woke left, yes. I gave Labour one shot and they have utterly blown it, already
Also don’t get me wrong. I would LIKE the Tories to return to the patriotic small state low immigration capitalist non-Woke principles of Mrs Thatcher. If they do that, and do it with conviction, I will be pleased
But they also need to do more than that. Because the situation is worse. As you well know Wokeness is rotting the country at its heart. The next right wing government needs to expunge it, with vigour, and it will not be pretty. I want to see a Tory leader able and willing to commit to this huge task
We need a peaceful revolution. Just as we needed a peaceful revolution in 1979 - and it was delivered
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
I'm not sure there's any limit to how far the twat would go.
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
I've got it!
You're just trolling EVERYONE.
I knew you weren't a globetrotting jetsetter just a retired geography teacher and Lib Dem Councillor from Tupsley who gets his jollies by winding gullible people up on 'tinternet.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
I would suggest the damage from this is predominantly domestic. It is red meat for Reform.
It’s 4D chess don’t you know
Red meat for reform so the Tories tack the the right and are caught in a pincer movement
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
I've got it!
You're just trolling EVERYONE.
I knew you weren't a globetrotting jetsetter just a retired geography teacher and Lib Dem Councillor from Tupsley who gets his jollies by winding gullible people up on 'tinternet.
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
I agree that there needs to be a much more positive approach to preventative care, but am sceptical that it will make the difference needed. The rise in obesity and diabetes etc is a worldwide phenomenon, and so is the decline in mortality from cardiac disease. The rest of the world is gorging on junk food, skiving exercise and hoping to jab themselves thin too. We are 55th of the 193 countries listed here for obesity rates: https://data.worldobesity.org/rankings/
As I pointed out in my header on the 70th Birthday of the NHS, insurance systems whether run by states or corporations are essentially re-distributive, shifting money from young healthy people to older and unhealthy people. Unless a lot of people are left without cover, the problem remains the same.
I think my proposal to untangle the knot to meet consumer demand, while maintaining a service for everyone of individual SIPP accounts ringfenced for health and social care is a much better one than insurance. It would be reasonable to be able to pay for gym memberships* etc from this too, but would give individual citizens a pot to pay for private healthcare and generate a better and more consumer responsive private medical system in this country.
*not that I am convinced gyms are the answer. Far better is exercise designed into life for active travel, so walking and cycling are the default.
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country. Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
Yup. That's the first point.
The second is that if you say that out loud in an election, you inevitably lose to someone with the dishonesty to say "no, everything is fine, here have another tax cut". I might wish that weren't the case, but it's true. Lies are more powerful than truths in the short term.
So the least-bad fix is... roughly what looks like it's incoming. Lots to dislike about it, and it may not work, but the alternatives are worse.
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
Smells like currygate all over again.
Maybe wait for police to determine the position
Like Currygate?
It could of course be like the airport footage where we only get to see what the interested parties want us to see.
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
Smells like currygate all over again.
Maybe wait for police to determine the position
Why? You never do.
I have posted a video from UK politics and used allegedly
Have some people been at the lagershed very early today?
I'm looking forward to the aggressive flameout(s) this evening.
I'm looking forward to the Budget. It is going to be hilarious here. Almost makes tax rises worthwhile and good value for money. Let's hope Reeves has the imagination to make some heads explode.
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
Smells like currygate all over again.
Maybe wait for police to determine the position
Why? You never do.
I have posted a video from UK politics and used allegedly
If it upsets you then that is not my problem
Whatever happened, the Labour MP is clearly totally blotto
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
Smells like currygate all over again.
Maybe wait for police to determine the position
Like Currygate?
It could of course be like the airport footage where we only get to see what the interested parties want us to see.
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
He is a traitorous c*nt
Remember that one of the “reasons” for the Chagos Surrender was that it would “increase our influence and soft power”. Instead everyone has laughed at Starmer and Labour for being such a weak bunch of fucking cucks and now they are demanding the UK pay seven trillion quid and forcing Starmer to sign this communique
WANKERS
He's surely empowered Putin too. How long before Russian tanks are in Sevenoaks because the great big girl's blouse is too scared to use Trident?
Reading some of today’s comments, I’m worried that some on here would prefer Putin to Starmer. I’m thinking I’ve accidentally logged onto Con Home.
It's like we've turned into the cigar room in some Mayfair den in the 70s.
Chaps cussing the reds and working themselves up into a right old lather.
Do you think Harris is a good candidate.
I think Harris is a sincere candidate, to use a word bandied around. Whether she's a winning candidate depends on how much the American voter actually values sincerity.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
A caller to Any Answers claims that the final payments by way of compensation for loss to former slave owners (‘ descendants) were only paid a decade or so back. Is this true?
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
Smells like currygate all over again.
Maybe wait for police to determine the position
Why? You never do.
I have posted a video from UK politics and used allegedly
If it upsets you then that is not my problem
It doesn’t upset me. I merely call it as another one of your fart-sniffing “currygate” stories.
I may be peremptory, but - hey - this is PB. Speculation is written on the tin.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
Smells like currygate all over again.
Maybe wait for police to determine the position
Why? You never do.
I have posted a video from UK politics and used allegedly
If it upsets you then that is not my problem
It doesn’t upset me. I merely call it as another one of your fart-sniffing “currygate” stories.
I may be peremptory, but - hey - this is PB. Speculation is written on the tin.
It does upset you as you would otherwise not respond with a knee-jerk reaction
🔺 NEW: Sir Keir Starmer has been forced to promise Commonwealth countries that Britain will discuss reparations for slavery next year as he failed to quash an official call for damages
As I said before, I think he's actually a traitor. He loathes this country and can't wait to destroy it.
Agreed. It can only be that.
If he’s not a traitor he is the worst politician in history who always ends up with the worst possible deal for this country. Remember he’s the guy who not only gave away the Chagos to China but AGREED A DEAL WHERE WE PAY FOR THAT
He (i.e., we) will be ripped apart by China, the EU, Spain, the Commonwealth and the USA in any trade deal or geopolitical negotiation over the next 4 years. It's going to cost us a fortune. Some of it permanently, I'm afraid.
I just hope the Tories can unpick it all when they reset and get back in office 🙏
He is a traitorous c*nt
Remember that one of the “reasons” for the Chagos Surrender was that it would “increase our influence and soft power”. Instead everyone has laughed at Starmer and Labour for being such a weak bunch of fucking cucks and now they are demanding the UK pay seven trillion quid and forcing Starmer to sign this communique
WANKERS
He's surely empowered Putin too. How long before Russian tanks are in Sevenoaks because the great big girl's blouse is too scared to use Trident?
Reading some of today’s comments, I’m worried that some on here would prefer Putin to Starmer. I’m thinking I’ve accidentally logged onto Con Home.
It's like we've turned into the cigar room in some Mayfair den in the 70s.
Chaps cussing the reds and working themselves up into a right old lather.
It’s also on Spotify, Apple, Google, Amazon podcasts etc.
Also tens of millions of hits on various clips on Twitter and other similar platforms, plus loads of podcasters and commentators doing reviews and watch-alongs.
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country. Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
That is a fair analysis and Labour were disingenuous by not spelling out a requirement for tax rises. That will hurt them, but the Conservatives will remain in the firing line for their years of genuine corruption, and for a long while yet.
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country. Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
That is a fair analysis and Labour were disingenuous by not spelling out a requirement for tax rises. That will hurt them, but the Conservatives will remain in the firing line for years of genuine corruption for a long while yet. PM Farage anyone?
Somewhat disingenuous, yes. We also live in an age of hysterical media “gotchas” and so increasingly the best strategy is to avoid the truth. One of the key lessons of May’s ill-fated social care cap.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
Not my party.
By the way you support freedom of movement with the EU.
Even when you go around Paris telling us how much you hate the people you see there.
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country. Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
That is a fair analysis and Labour were disingenuous by not spelling out a requirement for tax rises. That will hurt them, but the Conservatives will remain in the firing line for their years of genuine corruption, and for a long while yet.
PM Farage anyone?
Rather him than the current lot. I didn't vote Labour, but I didn't expect them to be so shit after three months that Reform would seem preferable.
By decolonised I assumed it would be reverting to a Welsh name! What I find most objectionable about the postmodern non thinkers is their terrible use of language. Whether that be due to stupidity, laziness, blatant dishonesty or a combination of all three I don't know.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
And it started so well with a thought provoking piece by MaxPB.
In the runup to 1997, there was a strand on the Conservative right that looked at opposition as a fun sabbatical. A few years out of office, we can do the punching for a bit.
I don't recall it being said so much this year- the party basically died some time ago, and the undertaker arrived to carry off the decaying stiff on July 4.
The thing is, opposition is fun, punching is fun, especially when it's someone as punchable as Sir Kier. But it doesn't actually make a difference. For the next four and a bit years, what the Conservatives do in Parliament is basically irrelevant. And, for all the noise, Labour remains ahead on the polls.
Punch a punchbag as much as you like, it won't respond. And, as anyone who has been systematically blanked knows, the lack of response is the most annoying thing on the world.
And yet PB is full of lefties whining that we are all being mean about the government. You aren’t “blanking” us, at all
But what you and I say doesn't really matter. We're just randoms on the internet.
But at the point where it matters, Downing Street, this is all irrelevant. I doubt they would even summon up the energy to think "oh dear, how sad, never mind".
For the bit of the political ecosystem that is used to having the ear of government (and Blair listened to them in a way that Starmer isn't), I imagine that will hurt.
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country. Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
That is a fair analysis and Labour were disingenuous by not spelling out a requirement for tax rises. That will hurt them, but the Conservatives will remain in the firing line for their years of genuine corruption, and for a long while yet.
PM Farage anyone?
Maybe will hurt them. Cameron promised no rise in VAT in the 2010 election. First thing Osborne did, increase VAT. Didn't do them any damage at all.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
I honestly can't. Cameron was bad at foreign affairs but absolutely nowhere near as bad as this. SKS is, improbably, still at the level of 6th form politics of not realising that actions have consequences.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
Its not impossible at all, probably a 50/50 shot at the next election. Also can be proud of Empire but sorry for some of what it did. I wouldnt be surprised if Starmer tries to balance it out like that at some point. Lots of positions are possible and reasonable.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
Not my party.
By the way you support freedom of movement with the EU.
Even when you go around Paris telling us how much you hate the people you see there.
You lack intellectual coherence.
Your last line does not require its last word and a third...
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Its a further forty years since the colonial era.
A further forty years from when the former colonies becoming responsible for their own outcomes.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
I guess the questions are whether the Georgian Dream vote share percentage will start with a 6, 7, 8 or 9 and how many people they will have to kill to disperse the protests that follow?
Overall I wouldn't exactly say that they're being subtle about it.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
A caller to Any Answers claims that the final payments by way of compensation for loss to former slave owners (‘ descendants) were only paid a decade or so back. Is this true?
Wasn’t it the interest on the loan the then Govt took out to fund the payments, rather than the payments themselves?
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
That’s the point I made yesterday about our increasingly Hobbesian world.
I don’t wish for Britain to surrender its long-standing support for international institutions, but there seems to be gross lack of realpolitik and, at the end of the day, simple self-belief.
The Empire to me a key battle-line, because it is an essential part of British experience 1600-1960. It’s impossible to imagine the UK without it.
And therefore a total repudiation and condemnation of it really calls into question whether the UK itself has any legitimacy.
Looking at the Far Right activity in London today, sans Yaxley-Lennon, one small note is that they seem to be repurposing evangelical anthems.
I've noticed before (but not noted here) that they have someone who is I think linked to a 'church' (more cult than church tbh - it's one of those set up around a "Prophet" from Africa who preaches a prosperity gospel) called the Spirit Embassy, London.
This report today from the Independent:
Freedom band singer thanks Jesus Christ for the life of Tommy Robinson.
Introducing a song called ‘Just one touch from the King, changes everything *’, singer Rikky Doolan leading his Patriots Gospel Band launches into a passionate defence of the activist. There are a few vids on Youtube of the performance of the Patriots Gospel Band.
He tells the crowd gathering at Parliament Square: “Before I came to our lord Jesus Christ I was homeless on the streets of Manchester. But just one touch from him radicalised my life.
I've noted before that the Far Right have been pushing Christian Heritage and crusader type imagery as a related theme to the anti-Islam rhetoric, which also fits in with the politics of some streams of football supporter organisation. That's echoed to some extent in Ref UK and some Tory Right rhetoric, around the nativism of the NatCon movement.
I think the tradition it is probably mclosest to is Paisleyite Northern Irish and similar.
* Here's what I think is the original of that song, in a worship leader conference context. You can see how the first line "There's a battle raging" will feed in to the self-image. It's fairly light on theology; if they went for the more theological ones, it would also be about humanity as one and service not power, which would blow up their racist beliefs - so they won't touch those, they'll just give the crowd baby food to zonk out to.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Maggie merely gave away Hong Kong.
The lease ran out on most of the territory leaving the rest unviable.
Looking at the Far Right activity in London today, sans Yaxley-Lennon, one small note is that seem to be repurposing evangelical anthems.
I've noticed before (but not noted here) that they have someone who is I think linked to a 'church' (more cult than church tbh - it's one of those set up around a "Prophet" from Africa who preaches a prosperity gospel) called the Spirit Embassy, London.
This from the Independent:
Freedom band singer thanks Jesus Christ for the life of Tommy Robinson Introducing a song called ‘Just one touch from the King, changes everything *’, singer Rikky Doolan leading his Patriots Gospel Band launches into a passionate defence of the activist. There are a few vids on Youtube of the performance of the Patriots Gospel Band.
He tells the crowd gathering at Parliament Square: “Before I came to our lord Jesus Christ I was homeless on the streets of Manchester. But just one touch from him radicalised my life.
I've noted before that the Far Right have been pushing Christian Heritage and crusader type imagery as a related theme to the anti-Islam rhetoric, which also fits in with the politics of some streams of football supporter organisation. That's echoed to some extent in Ref UK and some Tory Right rhetoric.
I think the tradition it is probably modelled on is Paisleyite Northern Irish and similar.
* Here's what I think is the original of that song, in a worship leader conference context. You can see how the first line "There's a battle raging" will feed in to the self-image. It's fairly theology light; if they went for the theological ones, it would also be about humanity as one and service not power, which would blow up their beliefs - so they won't touch those, they'll just give then baby food to zonk out to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLs6Kl3wgtk
Wonder if they are funded by some evangelical billionaires from across the pond? Feels fairly inevitable that grifters will chase that money.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
Not my party.
By the way you support freedom of movement with the EU.
Even when you go around Paris telling us how much you hate the people you see there.
You lack intellectual coherence.
This is like being critiqued by an angry 14 year old
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country. Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
That is a fair analysis and Labour were disingenuous by not spelling out a requirement for tax rises. That will hurt them, but the Conservatives will remain in the firing line for years of genuine corruption for a long while yet. PM Farage anyone?
Somewhat disingenuous, yes. We also live in an age of hysterical media “gotchas” and so increasingly the best strategy is to avoid the truth. One of the key lessons of May’s ill-fated social care cap.
Feeling you have to rule out any course of action that might hurt you electorally with floating voters is not an ideal preparation for government should you duly win. But this seems to be how we roll these days.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
You voted for him.
And you have no excuses - he's your MP and you know full well that type of person.
And you still want to destroy the Conservative party even though they're the only was to remove Labour from government.
I cordially despise your party because of the last 14 years and eighty five trillion immigrants and I will continue to do so until you express proper contrition for that, and ALSO a serious plan to tilt the country to the right
I’m not ruling it out, at least you have gone for the two right wing candidates, But they have an awful lot of work to do, to win back people like me
Not my party.
By the way you support freedom of movement with the EU.
Even when you go around Paris telling us how much you hate the people you see there.
You lack intellectual coherence.
This is like being critiqued by an angry 14 year old
That video doesn't show much. What happened before? (I'm guessing from the way it starts that it has been edited/cut. and that, as always, is suspicious.)
It seems the police are involved so let's see what happens
Nothing for about 18 months by recent standards then.
It’s obvious from the reporting that the UK suffered a diplomatic defeat at the Commonwealth.
Reparations were not even on the agenda, so the UK has been “hijacked”. And despite Starmer’s pleading, it is not obvious at all the money is not to be discussed.
Starmer said none of the discussions at the summit had concerned money.
“Well, no figure,” Frederick Mitchell, the foreign minister of the Bahamas told BBC Radio’s Today programme on Saturday. “We’ll see what happens going forward.”
He said he hoped a report on the issue would follow, which nations would discuss in the future. Mitchell also mentioned the UK government’s decision in 2013 to recognise the torture of Kenyans by British colonial forces during the Mau Mau uprising, which resulted in a £20m payout. “I have no doubt …. that the arc of history always goes in the right direction,” he said.
Max’s piece is fine as far as it goes, but below the line he is reduced to pleading for more cookery lessons.
The last government near-bankrupted the country. Osborne starved infrastructure (and is now said to regret it), and the Tories wasted years down a Brexit wank-hole. Sunak was simply inept, and he and Hunt left a frankly impossible set of forward projections.
Starmer and Reeves don’t inspire much, but it’s also fair to say they’ve been left with the worst inheritance of any government since the 1970s. And the forthcoming NI rise merely reverse Hunt’s unaffordable cuts.
You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but taxes must increase given the demographic of the country. It’s true in the UK and it’s true around the world. Only the US is really able to keep printing debt to avoid that trade-off, and even there reality will one day will catch up with them.
Yup. That's the first point.
The second is that if you say that out loud in an election, you inevitably lose to someone with the dishonesty to say "no, everything is fine, here have another tax cut". I might wish that weren't the case, but it's true. Lies are more powerful than truths in the short term.
So the least-bad fix is... roughly what looks like it's incoming. Lots to dislike about it, and it may not work, but the alternatives are worse.
The electorate need to cop on and take responsibility, otherwise democracy is essentially impossible.
I don't think things are as bad as you make out, although it does often look like it.
It’s obvious from the reporting that the UK suffered a diplomatic defeat at the Commonwealth.
Reparations were not even on the agenda, so the UK has been “hijacked”. And despite Starmer’s pleading, it is not obvious at all the money is not to be discussed.
Starmer said none of the discussions at the summit had concerned money.
“Well, no figure,” Frederick Mitchell, the foreign minister of the Bahamas told BBC Radio’s Today programme on Saturday. “We’ll see what happens going forward.”
He said he hoped a report on the issue would follow, which nations would discuss in the future. Mitchell also mentioned the UK government’s decision in 2013 to recognise the torture of Kenyans by British colonial forces during the Mau Mau uprising, which resulted in a £20m payout. “I have no doubt …. that the arc of history always goes in the right direction,” he said.
Britain should simply dissolve the commonwealth. Fuck em. Hand it over to China and ask then to give us Shanghai again
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody who can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
When he first burst on the scene, lots of people thought the danger was that a real politician might copy his style.
The reason this hasn't happened is that in truth, Trump is the real politician, and his would-be imitators are just managers with overinflated egos.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
Somewhat amazingly that's right. Most would.
Michael Moore called it right way back in 2016. Nothing much has changed in the last eight years, at least not against Trump and what he stands for.
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
It’s obvious from the reporting that the UK suffered a diplomatic defeat at the Commonwealth.
Reparations were not even on the agenda, so the UK has been “hijacked”. And despite Starmer’s pleading, it is not obvious at all the money is not to be discussed.
Starmer said none of the discussions at the summit had concerned money.
“Well, no figure,” Frederick Mitchell, the foreign minister of the Bahamas told BBC Radio’s Today programme on Saturday. “We’ll see what happens going forward.”
He said he hoped a report on the issue would follow, which nations would discuss in the future. Mitchell also mentioned the UK government’s decision in 2013 to recognise the torture of Kenyans by British colonial forces during the Mau Mau uprising, which resulted in a £20m payout. “I have no doubt …. that the arc of history always goes in the right direction,” he said.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
That’s the point I made yesterday about our increasingly Hobbesian world.
I don’t wish for Britain to surrender its long-standing support for international institutions, but there seems to be gross lack of realpolitik and, at the end of the day, simple self-belief.
The Empire to me a key battle-line, because it is an essential part of British experience 1600-1960. It’s impossible to imagine the UK without it.
And therefore a total repudiation and condemnation of it really calls into question whether the UK itself has any legitimacy.
However cruel, selfish, and exploitative it was, the Industrial Revolution, which was kick-started in the UK, has been a huge blessing to humanity.
It’s hard to imagine just how dreadful the standard of living was in 1800, for the 90% of the world’s inhabitants then, who lived in absolute poverty. The richest country in the world, the UK, had a standard of living worse than modern Haiti.
Industrialisation and trade liberated the world from all that.
However cruel and bigoted the 19th century may seem, from 2024, it was an era of constant social progress.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
That’s the point I made yesterday about our increasingly Hobbesian world.
I don’t wish for Britain to surrender its long-standing support for international institutions, but there seems to be gross lack of realpolitik and, at the end of the day, simple self-belief.
The Empire to me a key battle-line, because it is an essential part of British experience 1600-1960. It’s impossible to imagine the UK without it.
And therefore a total repudiation and condemnation of it really calls into question whether the UK itself has any legitimacy.
The sanctification of the UN remains a real problem. If the west ever did control these institutions it certainly doesn't anymore. Watching the secretary general of the UN Antonio Guterres hugging Alexander Lukashenko like an old friend at the BRICS summit was indicative.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody who can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
When he first burst on the scene, lots of people thought the danger was that a real politician might copy his style.
The reason this hasn't happened is that in truth, Trump is the real politician, and his would-be imitators are just managers with overinflated egos.
Alternatively, no real politician has the collection of personality disorders demonstrated by Trump.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
A caller to Any Answers claims that the final payments by way of compensation for loss to former slave owners (‘ descendants) were only paid a decade or so back. Is this true?
No, that's a misunderstanding. The debt incurred to compensate former slave owners was only paid off quite recently.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
So did Blair.
FWIW, I still think the Empire was on balance a good thing - and I don't even think it's on balance, but clearly a good thing.
It’s obvious from the reporting that the UK suffered a diplomatic defeat at the Commonwealth.
Reparations were not even on the agenda, so the UK has been “hijacked”. And despite Starmer’s pleading, it is not obvious at all the money is not to be discussed.
Starmer said none of the discussions at the summit had concerned money.
“Well, no figure,” Frederick Mitchell, the foreign minister of the Bahamas told BBC Radio’s Today programme on Saturday. “We’ll see what happens going forward.”
He said he hoped a report on the issue would follow, which nations would discuss in the future. Mitchell also mentioned the UK government’s decision in 2013 to recognise the torture of Kenyans by British colonial forces during the Mau Mau uprising, which resulted in a £20m payout. “I have no doubt …. that the arc of history always goes in the right direction,” he said.
The Bahamas is, of course, a super-rich playground and tax haven.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
Somewhat amazingly that's right. Most would.
Michael Moore called it right way back in 2016. Nothing much has changed in the last eight years, at least not against Trump and what he stands for.
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
Trump is not 'bringing the people with him'. He is lying to them; giving them simple answers to complex issues; blaming the 'other'.
He and his ilk will not help the average man and woman in America. He will help the grifters and the techbroes. And whilst he does it, he will lie and blame the *other*. which is fine if you are not the 'other' - until, as history shows, you become the 'other'.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Its a further forty years since the colonial era.
A further forty years from when the former colonies becoming responsible for their own outcomes.
Yes but general awareness (here) of the scope and legacy of slavery was far less then than now.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
That’s the point I made yesterday about our increasingly Hobbesian world.
I don’t wish for Britain to surrender its long-standing support for international institutions, but there seems to be gross lack of realpolitik and, at the end of the day, simple self-belief.
The Empire to me a key battle-line, because it is an essential part of British experience 1600-1960. It’s impossible to imagine the UK without it.
And therefore a total repudiation and condemnation of it really calls into question whether the UK itself has any legitimacy.
Exactly, which is no doubt the agenda some secretly harbour.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Maggie merely gave away Hong Kong.
And rather more importantly, didn't give away the Falklands.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
The international rules-based order exists so far as it does only because it's backed up by Western military might, overwhelmingly US.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
That’s the point I made yesterday about our increasingly Hobbesian world.
I don’t wish for Britain to surrender its long-standing support for international institutions, but there seems to be gross lack of realpolitik and, at the end of the day, simple self-belief.
The Empire to me a key battle-line, because it is an essential part of British experience 1600-1960. It’s impossible to imagine the UK without it.
And therefore a total repudiation and condemnation of it really calls into question whether the UK itself has any legitimacy.
However cruel, selfish, and exploitative it was, the Industrial Revolution, which was kick-started in the UK, has been a huge blessing to humanity.
It’s hard to imagine just how dreadful the standard of living was in 1800, for the 90% of the world’s inhabitants then, who lived in absolute poverty. The richest country in the world, the UK, had a standard of living worse than modern Haiti.
Industrialisation and trade liberated the world from all that.
However cruel and bigoted the 19th century may seem, from 2024, it was an era of constant social progress.
This is also my view. The last point is also critical, it wasn’t just economic progress, it was broadly liberal progress too.
However, it seems our view is dying out, or is perhaps already extinguished.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
Somewhat amazingly that's right. Most would.
Michael Moore called it right way back in 2016. Nothing much has changed in the last eight years, at least not against Trump and what he stands for.
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
Trump is not 'bringing the people with him'. He is lying to them; giving them simple answers to complex issues; blaming the 'other'.
He and his ilk will not help the average man and woman in America. He will help the grifters and the techbroes. And whilst he does it, he will lie and blame the *other*. which is fine if you are not the 'other' - until, as history shows, you become the 'other'.
No, the problem is that the traditional politicans are not bringing the people with them, which is why they are voting for the revolutionary.
The revolutionary may or may not actually help them, but he’s at least making the effort to talk to them before the election.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Its a further forty years since the colonial era.
A further forty years from when the former colonies becoming responsible for their own outcomes.
Yes but general awareness (here) of the scope and legacy of slavery was far less then than now.
Howard Jacobson was right, that Edward Said managed to turn perpetual grievance into an academic discipline.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
Somewhat amazingly that's right. Most would.
Michael Moore called it right way back in 2016. Nothing much has changed in the last eight years, at least not against Trump and what he stands for.
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
Trump is not 'bringing the people with him'. He is lying to them; giving them simple answers to complex issues; blaming the 'other'.
He and his ilk will not help the average man and woman in America. He will help the grifters and the techbroes. And whilst he does it, he will lie and blame the *other*. which is fine if you are not the 'other' - until, as history shows, you become the 'other'.
No, the problem is that the traditional politicans are not bringing the people with them, which is why they are voting for the revolutionary.
The revolutionary may or may not actually help them, but he’s at least making the effort to talk to them before the election.
"Not bringing the people with them."
He isn't though, is he? The polls - if you believe them - show it to be pretty much neck-and-neck, like many previous presidential elections.
And as for him 'talking'; yes, he makes noises. But no sense. And his mates are doing little but spreading hate.
It’s obvious from the reporting that the UK suffered a diplomatic defeat at the Commonwealth.
Reparations were not even on the agenda, so the UK has been “hijacked”. And despite Starmer’s pleading, it is not obvious at all the money is not to be discussed.
Starmer said none of the discussions at the summit had concerned money.
“Well, no figure,” Frederick Mitchell, the foreign minister of the Bahamas told BBC Radio’s Today programme on Saturday. “We’ll see what happens going forward.”
He said he hoped a report on the issue would follow, which nations would discuss in the future. Mitchell also mentioned the UK government’s decision in 2013 to recognise the torture of Kenyans by British colonial forces during the Mau Mau uprising, which resulted in a £20m payout. “I have no doubt …. that the arc of history always goes in the right direction,” he said.
The difference between an Empire and a Commonwealth.
In an Empire, this proposal could have been shot down-literally if necessary. In a Commonwealth where lots of national leaders get kudos from their voters for this sort of thing, there's much less Britain can do. Primus inter pares is a much weaker position than Primus.
It's the question that has plagued us since 1945- what exactly is Britain's role? One can say "soft power, punching above its weight, top of the second division, honest broker..." but what does that actually look like? And is the national psyche prepared for that? Neither "we're great" or "we're awful" is satisfactory, let alone mad flapping between the two.
Looking at the Far Right activity in London today, sans Yaxley-Lennon, one small note is that seem to be repurposing evangelical anthems.
I've noticed before (but not noted here) that they have someone who is I think linked to a 'church' (more cult than church tbh - it's one of those set up around a "Prophet" from Africa who preaches a prosperity gospel) called the Spirit Embassy, London.
This from the Independent:
Freedom band singer thanks Jesus Christ for the life of Tommy Robinson Introducing a song called ‘Just one touch from the King, changes everything *’, singer Rikky Doolan leading his Patriots Gospel Band launches into a passionate defence of the activist. There are a few vids on Youtube of the performance of the Patriots Gospel Band.
He tells the crowd gathering at Parliament Square: “Before I came to our lord Jesus Christ I was homeless on the streets of Manchester. But just one touch from him radicalised my life.
I've noted before that the Far Right have been pushing Christian Heritage and crusader type imagery as a related theme to the anti-Islam rhetoric, which also fits in with the politics of some streams of football supporter organisation. That's echoed to some extent in Ref UK and some Tory Right rhetoric.
I think the tradition it is probably modelled on is Paisleyite Northern Irish and similar.
* Here's what I think is the original of that song, in a worship leader conference context. You can see how the first line "There's a battle raging" will feed in to the self-image. It's fairly theology light; if they went for the theological ones, it would also be about humanity as one and service not power, which would blow up their beliefs - so they won't touch those, they'll just give then baby food to zonk out to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLs6Kl3wgtk
Wonder if they are funded by some evangelical billionaires from across the pond? Feels fairly inevitable that grifters will chase that money.
Without trying to identify links or draw conclusions, it's notable that Farage gets funding from abroad, and Yaxley-Lennon has various sources.
I can't comment on USA billionaries, but there's Paul Marshall in there somewhere.
There are some people who have picked up the slight obsession with "more British babies" who I would hope would know better, such as Miriam Cates. She has background in circles that imo should mean she wouldn't fall for that one.
In my view this is one ideological route by which such values are entering the relative mainstream.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
That’s the point I made yesterday about our increasingly Hobbesian world.
I don’t wish for Britain to surrender its long-standing support for international institutions, but there seems to be gross lack of realpolitik and, at the end of the day, simple self-belief.
The Empire to me a key battle-line, because it is an essential part of British experience 1600-1960. It’s impossible to imagine the UK without it.
And therefore a total repudiation and condemnation of it really calls into question whether the UK itself has any legitimacy.
However cruel, selfish, and exploitative it was, the Industrial Revolution, which was kick-started in the UK, has been a huge blessing to humanity.
It’s hard to imagine just how dreadful the standard of living was in 1800, for the 90% of the world’s inhabitants then, who lived in absolute poverty. The richest country in the world, the UK, had a standard of living worse than modern Haiti.
Industrialisation and trade liberated the world from all that.
However cruel and bigoted the 19th century may seem, from 2024, it was an era of constant social progress.
This is also my view. The last point is also critical, it wasn’t just economic progress, it was broadly liberal progress too.
However, it seems our view is dying out, or is perhaps already extinguished.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
I think it's strange that as the world moves back towards the pre-1945 view that the strong do as they will, the weak as they must, our own leaders are in complete denial about it.
That’s the point I made yesterday about our increasingly Hobbesian world.
I don’t wish for Britain to surrender its long-standing support for international institutions, but there seems to be gross lack of realpolitik and, at the end of the day, simple self-belief.
The Empire to me a key battle-line, because it is an essential part of British experience 1600-1960. It’s impossible to imagine the UK without it.
And therefore a total repudiation and condemnation of it really calls into question whether the UK itself has any legitimacy.
However cruel, selfish, and exploitative it was, the Industrial Revolution, which was kick-started in the UK, has been a huge blessing to humanity.
It’s hard to imagine just how dreadful the standard of living was in 1800, for the 90% of the world’s inhabitants then, who lived in absolute poverty. The richest country in the world, the UK, had a standard of living worse than modern Haiti.
Industrialisation and trade liberated the world from all that.
However cruel and bigoted the 19th century may seem, from 2024, it was an era of constant social progress.
This is also my view. The last point is also critical, it wasn’t just economic progress, it was broadly liberal progress too.
However, it seems our view is dying out, or is perhaps already extinguished.
Well, my current university, Buckingham is a holdout.
It does seem a peculiarly British (and North East US thing). The Spanish and French certainly don't have this sense of guilt. Spain's socialist government sent a very harsh response to the Mexican President who wanted an apology for Cortes.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
Somewhat amazingly that's right. Most would.
Michael Moore called it right way back in 2016. Nothing much has changed in the last eight years, at least not against Trump and what he stands for.
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
Trump is not 'bringing the people with him'. He is lying to them; giving them simple answers to complex issues; blaming the 'other'.
He and his ilk will not help the average man and woman in America. He will help the grifters and the techbroes. And whilst he does it, he will lie and blame the *other*. which is fine if you are not the 'other' - until, as history shows, you become the 'other'.
No, the problem is that the traditional politicans are not bringing the people with them, which is why they are voting for the revolutionary.
The revolutionary may or may not actually help them, but he’s at least making the effort to talk to them before the election.
"Not bringing the people with them."
He isn't though, is he? The polls - if you believe them - show it to be pretty much neck-and-neck, like many previous presidential elections.
And as for him 'talking'; yes, he makes noises. But no sense. And his mates are doing little but spreading hate.
If you mapped current polls onto the demographics of 1990s America, Trump would be winning by a landslide.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
Somewhat amazingly that's right. Most would.
Michael Moore called it right way back in 2016. Nothing much has changed in the last eight years, at least not against Trump and what he stands for.
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
Trump is not 'bringing the people with him'. He is lying to them; giving them simple answers to complex issues; blaming the 'other'.
He and his ilk will not help the average man and woman in America. He will help the grifters and the techbroes. And whilst he does it, he will lie and blame the *other*. which is fine if you are not the 'other' - until, as history shows, you become the 'other'.
No, the problem is that the traditional politicans are not bringing the people with them, which is why they are voting for the revolutionary.
The revolutionary may or may not actually help them, but he’s at least making the effort to talk to them before the election.
"Not bringing the people with them."
He isn't though, is he? The polls - if you believe them - show it to be pretty much neck-and-neck, like many previous presidential elections.
And as for him 'talking'; yes, he makes noises. But no sense. And his mates are doing little but spreading hate.
If you mapped current polls onto the demographics of 1990s America, Trump would be winning by a landslide.
Which would be a meaningless action, even *if* true. That's not the way elections or polling works - especially the polling we are seeing from the US at the moment.
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Osborne, yes. Cameron, I think not.
Impossible to imagine a British PM now suggesting, as Cameron did, that he was proud of the Empire. But that was only 2013.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
So did Blair.
FWIW, I still think the Empire was on balance a good thing - and I don't even think it's on balance, but clearly a good thing.
Looking at the Far Right activity in London today, sans Yaxley-Lennon, one small note is that seem to be repurposing evangelical anthems.
I've noticed before (but not noted here) that they have someone who is I think linked to a 'church' (more cult than church tbh - it's one of those set up around a "Prophet" from Africa who preaches a prosperity gospel) called the Spirit Embassy, London.
This from the Independent:
Freedom band singer thanks Jesus Christ for the life of Tommy Robinson Introducing a song called ‘Just one touch from the King, changes everything *’, singer Rikky Doolan leading his Patriots Gospel Band launches into a passionate defence of the activist. There are a few vids on Youtube of the performance of the Patriots Gospel Band.
He tells the crowd gathering at Parliament Square: “Before I came to our lord Jesus Christ I was homeless on the streets of Manchester. But just one touch from him radicalised my life.
I've noted before that the Far Right have been pushing Christian Heritage and crusader type imagery as a related theme to the anti-Islam rhetoric, which also fits in with the politics of some streams of football supporter organisation. That's echoed to some extent in Ref UK and some Tory Right rhetoric.
I think the tradition it is probably modelled on is Paisleyite Northern Irish and similar.
* Here's what I think is the original of that song, in a worship leader conference context. You can see how the first line "There's a battle raging" will feed in to the self-image. It's fairly theology light; if they went for the theological ones, it would also be about humanity as one and service not power, which would blow up their beliefs - so they won't touch those, they'll just give then baby food to zonk out to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLs6Kl3wgtk
Wonder if they are funded by some evangelical billionaires from across the pond? Feels fairly inevitable that grifters will chase that money.
Without trying to identify links or draw conclusions, it's notable that Farage gets funding from abroad, and Yaxley-Lennon has various sources.
I can't comment on USA billionaries, but there's Paul Marshall in there somewhere.
There are some people who have picked up the slight obsession with "more British babies" who I would hope would know better, such as Miriam Cates. She has background in circles that imo should mean she wouldn't fall for that one.
In my view this is one ideological route by which such values are entering the relative mainstream.
Generally speaking when birth rates fall it becomes a political issue. See Japan, Korea, Germany etc. To me it would be odd if it wasn't becoming a political issue. The desperation to see all issues that don't favour the outlook of the liberal elite as being to do with some kind of 'foreign' interference is just lazy. The demographic transformation we are seeing is very large.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
Somewhat amazingly that's right. Most would.
Michael Moore called it right way back in 2016. Nothing much has changed in the last eight years, at least not against Trump and what he stands for.
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
Revolution to free the downtrodden masses? Stirring stuff. But it's Donald Trump on the ballot. 2016 retread, older, crazier, and now proven democracy denier. So, you know, horseshit really.
If Trump was authentic he'd open every rally with, "Ha, just look at all you suckers believing I give a shit about anything but my own wealth power and glorification."
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
The sad thing is he could actually say that now and they would still cheer!
Somewhat amazingly that's right. Most would.
Michael Moore called it right way back in 2016. Nothing much has changed in the last eight years, at least not against Trump and what he stands for.
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
Revolution to help the downtrodden masses? Stirring stuff. But it's Donald Trump on the ballot. 2016 retread, older, crazier, and now proven democracy denier. So, you know. Horseshit really.
It'll be the ?first? ever revolution where the stated aim is to take wealth and power from the masses and give it to the few in power.
I mean, many revolutions in the past have had that effect, but they at least pretend to be helping the masses....
I just want to point out that when the Chagos Surrender happened and I went ape-shit on here, there was a lot of scoffing and “oh who cares it’s a tiny atoll you’ve never heard of before”
I responded that
1. I had definitely heard of it
2. The surrender was totally unnecessary and a strategic error of enormous proportions
And
3. One of the many reasons it was such a strategic error was that it would encourage all our enemies to take a run at us, perceiving us as weak and spineless with a stupid cowardly leader willing to yield to anything
Et voila
Indeed, there's no way that reparations or anything as stupid as that would be on the agenda had we not just paid billions to Mauritius to take the Chagos Islands off our hands. The Carribbean sense weakness and Starmer appointing reparations supporters like Lammy such high roles is another reason they know they can go for it and win. Starmer is a cuck.
Starmer should just have said “nah. Fuck off, I’m not signing that, it commits us to reparations”
But of course he’s incapable of showing backbone because he doesn’t have one, and deep down he agrees that Britain is evil and should pay
And that's the difference between him and Blair. Blair would have just laughed the whole discussion off and told the commonwealth nations to get back in their box because he fundamentally loved this country. Starmer very clearly doesn't, he sees us as part of the evil colonialist axis as so many lefties were indoctrinated to believe when they went to university by Marxist professors.
Could anyone imagine Margaret Thatcher, or even John Major signing it!
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
One can imagine Cameron taking a similar line if he were PM now. Times have changed since the Thatcher era.
Maggie merely gave away Hong Kong.
And rather more importantly, didn't give away the Falklands.
Only because the Argies got tired of talking and tried to jump the gun. More or less, any way; couple of our MP’s got wind of the discussion, and managed to stall them, whereupon the Argie government, looking to discourage the population from looking too closely at what else was going on and moved.
Comments
What the actual f**k?
But unless there's a very severe threat, hopefully involving a woman, child, or fluffy animal that the MP leaped to defend, this looks bad.
I don’t believe he’ll ever commit the UK to paying billions.
What he will do is offer some abject, and completely insincere, apology for slavery, before agreeing to pay symbolic reparations to governments who’ll stick the money in their offshore accounts.
That will set a precedent for anyone with a grudge against the UK to come calling.
He's an almighty fraud. Anybody who can't see that needs to go to specsavers.
Also don’t get me wrong. I would LIKE the Tories to return to the patriotic small state low immigration capitalist non-Woke principles of Mrs Thatcher. If they do that, and do it with conviction, I will be pleased
But they also need to do more than that. Because the situation is worse. As you well know Wokeness is rotting the country at its heart. The next right wing government needs to expunge it, with vigour, and it will not be pretty. I want to see a Tory leader able and willing to commit to this huge task
We need a peaceful revolution. Just as we needed a peaceful revolution in 1979 - and it was delivered
Red meat for reform so the Tories tack the the right and are caught in a pincer movement
But we’ve known he’s cracked for some time.
The second is that if you say that out loud in an election, you inevitably lose to someone with the dishonesty to say "no, everything is fine, here have another tax cut". I might wish that weren't the case, but it's true. Lies are more powerful than truths in the short term.
So the least-bad fix is... roughly what looks like it's incoming. Lots to dislike about it, and it may not work, but the alternatives are worse.
It could of course be like the airport footage where we only get to see what the interested parties want us to see.
Lloyd George’s birthplace to be decolonised.
https://x.com/tonydowson5/status/1850163413671989508?s=61
If it upsets you then that is not my problem
Hmmm.....
Whatever happened, the Labour MP is clearly totally blotto
https://uknip.co.uk/news/uk/breaking/labour-mp-mike-amesbury-accused-of-assaulting-local-constituent-in-frodsham/
I merely call it as another one of your fart-sniffing “currygate” stories.
I may be peremptory, but - hey - this is PB. Speculation is written on the tin.
And he certainly would have signed the Commonwealth declaration.
PM Farage anyone?
We also live in an age of hysterical media “gotchas” and so increasingly the best strategy is to avoid the truth.
One of the key lessons of May’s ill-fated social care cap.
By the way you support freedom of movement with the EU.
Even when you go around Paris telling us how much you hate the people you see there.
You lack intellectual coherence.
I didn't vote Labour, but I didn't expect them to be so shit after three months that Reform would seem preferable.
The last 10 years have really been a roller coaster.
But at the point where it matters, Downing Street, this is all irrelevant. I doubt they would even summon up the energy to think "oh dear, how sad, never mind".
For the bit of the political ecosystem that is used to having the ear of government (and Blair listened to them in a way that Starmer isn't), I imagine that will hurt.
SKS is, improbably, still at the level of 6th form politics of not realising that actions have consequences.
A further forty years from when the former colonies becoming responsible for their own outcomes.
Overall I wouldn't exactly say that they're being subtle about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_savings_account
From what little I have read, the plan Mitch Daniels established for Indiana public employees has been a success: https://www.in.gov/spd/benefits/health-savings-accounts/
Though it is not clear to me that it would work as well for those without stable jobs, and at least a high school education.
I don’t wish for Britain to surrender its long-standing support for international institutions, but there seems to be gross lack of realpolitik and, at the end of the day, simple self-belief.
The Empire to me a key battle-line, because it is an essential part of British experience 1600-1960. It’s impossible to imagine the UK without it.
And therefore a total repudiation and condemnation of it really calls into question whether the UK itself has any legitimacy.
I've noticed before (but not noted here) that they have someone who is I think linked to a 'church' (more cult than church tbh - it's one of those set up around a "Prophet" from Africa who preaches a prosperity gospel) called the Spirit Embassy, London.
This report today from the Independent:
Freedom band singer thanks Jesus Christ for the life of Tommy Robinson.
Introducing a song called ‘Just one touch from the King, changes everything *’, singer Rikky Doolan leading his Patriots Gospel Band launches into a passionate defence of the activist. There are a few vids on Youtube of the performance of the Patriots Gospel Band.
He tells the crowd gathering at Parliament Square: “Before I came to our lord Jesus Christ I was homeless on the streets of Manchester. But just one touch from him radicalised my life.
“And now I’m here with you. We thank that same Jesus Christ for the life of Tommy Robinson, we thank him for the heart, the spirit and the passion of that man.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-march-live-protests-london-far-right-met-police-b2636026.html
I've noted before that the Far Right have been pushing Christian Heritage and crusader type imagery as a related theme to the anti-Islam rhetoric, which also fits in with the politics of some streams of football supporter organisation. That's echoed to some extent in Ref UK and some Tory Right rhetoric, around the nativism of the NatCon movement.
I think the tradition it is probably mclosest to is Paisleyite Northern Irish and similar.
* Here's what I think is the original of that song, in a worship leader conference context. You can see how the first line "There's a battle raging" will feed in to the self-image. It's fairly light on theology; if they went for the more theological ones, it would also be about humanity as one and service not power, which would blow up their racist beliefs - so they won't touch those, they'll just give the crowd baby food to zonk out to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLs6Kl3wgtk
Reparations were not even on the agenda, so the UK has been “hijacked”. And despite Starmer’s pleading, it is not obvious at all the money is not to be discussed.
Starmer said none of the discussions at the summit had concerned money.
“Well, no figure,” Frederick Mitchell, the foreign minister of the Bahamas told BBC Radio’s Today programme on Saturday. “We’ll see what happens going forward.”
He said he hoped a report on the issue would follow, which nations would discuss in the future. Mitchell also mentioned the UK government’s decision in 2013 to recognise the torture of Kenyans by British colonial forces during the Mau Mau uprising, which resulted in a £20m payout. “I have no doubt …. that the arc of history always goes in the right direction,” he said.
I don't think things are as bad as you make out, although it does often look like it.
The reason this hasn't happened is that in truth, Trump is the real politician, and his would-be imitators are just managers with overinflated egos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMm5HfxNXY4
If the politicians don’t bring the people with them, and the middle class gets hollowed out in favour of a small elite, then eventually those disaffected will vote for the revolution.
It’s hard to imagine just how dreadful the standard of living was in 1800, for the 90% of the world’s inhabitants then, who lived in absolute poverty. The richest country in the world, the UK, had a standard of living worse than modern Haiti.
Industrialisation and trade liberated the world from all that.
However cruel and bigoted the 19th century may seem, from 2024, it was an era of constant social progress.
If not, here's a little song that will help anyone understand American culture, at its best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq3hEMUeBGQ&pp=ygUYY2VudGVyZmllbGQgam9obiBmb2dlcnR5
(In WW II, some American soldiers liked to say they were fighting for Mom, baseball, and apple pie.)
Disorders that make him box-office.
https://fullfact.org/economy/slavery-abolition-act-loan/
FWIW, I still think the Empire was on balance a good thing - and I don't even think it's on balance, but clearly a good thing.
He and his ilk will not help the average man and woman in America. He will help the grifters and the techbroes. And whilst he does it, he will lie and blame the *other*. which is fine if you are not the 'other' - until, as history shows, you become the 'other'.
On a sad note : Voyager 1 has not responded to the last three attempts at contact.
It is not a natural force of nature.
The last point is also critical, it wasn’t just economic progress, it was broadly liberal progress too.
However, it seems our view is dying out, or is perhaps already extinguished.
The revolutionary may or may not actually help them, but he’s at least making the effort to talk to them before the election.
He isn't though, is he? The polls - if you believe them - show it to be pretty much neck-and-neck, like many previous presidential elections.
And as for him 'talking'; yes, he makes noises. But no sense. And his mates are doing little but spreading hate.
In an Empire, this proposal could have been shot down-literally if necessary. In a Commonwealth where lots of national leaders get kudos from their voters for this sort of thing, there's much less Britain can do. Primus inter pares is a much weaker position than Primus.
It's the question that has plagued us since 1945- what exactly is Britain's role? One can say "soft power, punching above its weight, top of the second division, honest broker..." but what does that actually look like? And is the national psyche prepared for that? Neither "we're great" or "we're awful" is satisfactory, let alone mad flapping between the two.
I can't comment on USA billionaries, but there's Paul Marshall in there somewhere.
There are some people who have picked up the slight obsession with "more British babies" who I would hope would know better, such as Miriam Cates. She has background in circles that imo should mean she wouldn't fall for that one.
In my view this is one ideological route by which such values are entering the relative mainstream.
I believe we were assured that it had somehow been 'broken' ?
It does seem a peculiarly British (and North East US thing). The Spanish and French certainly don't have this sense of guilt. Spain's socialist government sent a very harsh response to the Mexican President who wanted an apology for Cortes.
I mean, many revolutions in the past have had that effect, but they at least pretend to be helping the masses....