The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
PS And perhaps those who vote for them are voting for 'better humans'
You might be right with SF - Ireland has an elected head of state and a written constitution. But UKIP and SNP? No. They don't want to overthrow the Westminster System, they just want to take power within it or a duplicate of it. That's not a subversion of the system, that's a continuation of it - meet the new boss, just the same as the old boss.
As for the 'better humans'? God, no. They are as prone to violence, casual cruelty, addiction, short-sightedness, tribalism, and general fuckwittedness as anybody else.
Well if you are going to be totally absurd then there is no point attempting to debate with you. However I can recommend a good surgeon who will be able to surgically remove your head from your lower bowel if you so wish.......
My points were:
* UKIP and SNP don't want to overthrow the system, just take power within it (or a duplicate) * UKIP and SNP politicians are humans with human flaws.
Difficult to know who will benefit from the campaign itself. From the Tories point of view they'll have the papers ramping it up in their favour and there'll be plenty of anti Labour and anti UKIP stories. However their campaign spend will be much limited compared to what they are spending now and the Lib Dems and UKIP will get a lot more attention than they're currently getting with their major party status.
* UKIP and SNP don't want to overthrow the system, just take power within it (or a duplicate) * UKIP and SNP politicians are humans with human flaws.
Neither of those points are absurd
Obviously UKIP are as much a part of the Establishment as the Tories and Labour are, just wanting their place at the trough.
But the idea the SNP are in any way like the Establishment parties when their sole aim is to end the Establishment and dissolve the United Kingdom is farcical.
The Institutions of the Trough are embodies in the United Kingdom and die with it. While Scotland may end up recreating them, that will be nothing to do with the aims of the SNP and merely down to human incompetence.
PEOPLE from poor backgrounds will get similar protection from discrimination as those from ethnic minorities if Labour wins power.
A legal duty forcing public bodies to help reduce inequality caused by class will be resurrected as part of plans to improve social mobility.
The measure in the Equality Act — called “Harman’s law” because it was championed by the deputy Labour leader, Harriet Harman — was scrapped after the 2010 election when Theresa May, the home secretary, branded it a bureaucratic box-ticking exercise.
PEOPLE from poor backgrounds will get similar protection from discrimination as those from ethnic minorities if Labour wins power.
A legal duty forcing public bodies to help reduce inequality caused by class will be resurrected as part of plans to improve social mobility.
The measure in the Equality Act — called “Harman’s law” because it was championed by the deputy Labour leader, Harriet Harman — was scrapped after the 2010 election when Theresa May, the home secretary, branded it a bureaucratic box-ticking exercise.
The state is the state. It is the biggest bully in the schoolyard, it is that entity with the monopoly of violence. It enforces its will with laws and backs it up with imprisonment, and takes its authority from a Crown appointed and anointed by God Himself. It is in everybody's interest that it represents the will of the people being governed, and it recognizes that that will is contradictory, conflicted, illogical and transitory. Until human nature changes and the answers to all questions known, the Westminster System is the best form of government yet invented. You want a better government? Make better humans.
Discourteous Government?
We've had that for 40 years or more.
The stench of arrogant condescending bullshit in the air is suffocating
Invent something better.
Indeed and that's what parties such as the SNP, UKIP, Greens, Plaid, SF are in large part about. All aspire to significantly redistribute political power in the United Kingdom. By redistributing power you redefine government. They are the result of 'discourteous government'
PS And perhaps those who vote for them are voting for 'better humans'
You might be right with SF - Ireland has an elected head of state and a written constitution. But UKIP and SNP? No. They don't want to overthrow the Westminster System, they just want to take power within it or a duplicate of it. That's not a subversion of the system, that's a continuation of it - meet the new boss, just the same as the old boss.
As for the 'better humans'? God, no. They are as prone to violence, casual cruelty, addiction, short-sightedness, tribalism, and general fuckwittedness as anybody else.
Well if you are going to be totally absurd then there is no point attempting to debate with you. However I can recommend a good surgeon who will be able to surgically remove your head from your lower bowel if you so wish.......
My points were:
* UKIP and SNP don't want to overthrow the system, just take power within it (or a duplicate) * UKIP and SNP politicians are humans with human flaws.
Neither of those points are absurd
You are being utterly absurd if you do not realise the redistribution of power that both parties demand will significantly change the nature of government in this country. if that is maintaining the status quo you need that surgeon As for the rest of your purile abusive post that was just moronic. Now enough. I can no longer be bothered with you tonight...
PEOPLE from poor backgrounds will get similar protection from discrimination as those from ethnic minorities if Labour wins power.
A legal duty forcing public bodies to help reduce inequality caused by class will be resurrected as part of plans to improve social mobility.
The measure in the Equality Act — called “Harman’s law” because it was championed by the deputy Labour leader, Harriet Harman — was scrapped after the 2010 election when Theresa May, the home secretary, branded it a bureaucratic box-ticking exercise.
What nonsense is this?! I know that some ideas can seem good at first glance but on reflection are clearly idiotic, and therefore that the reverse is possible in theory, but that seems particularly ludicrous. I don't even see how it even helps politically.
You are being utterly absurd if you do not realise the redistribution of power that both parties demand will significantly change the nature of government in this country. if that is maintaining the status quo you need that surgeon As for the rest of your purile abusive post that was just moronic. Now enough. I can no longer be bothered with you tonight...
UKIP have no interest in redistributing power away from Westminster. Once they have their snouts firmly in the trough they will simply maintain the system and cling on as long as possible. They're just another Establishment party led by another posh public schoolboy whose inherited wealth means he's never needed to do a hard days work in his life.
...If Navalny who's a small fish can be under house arrest, why not Nemtsov?
His murder is very unusual, nobody had got murdered that close to the Kremlin before, though there was an attempt on Brezhnev in 1969...
Speedy, Navalny really isn't a 'small fish' - he's very respected and admired as one of the most courageous and vocal opponents of Putin. His blog is an extraordinary catalogue of injustice, but also has a dark sense of humour about the Kafkaesque moments he has experienced himself, with photos, films, etc. I've followed it for years.
Nemtsov and Navalny - they are remarkable men.
I think the murder last night was planned so that the Kremlin would loom large in all the news stories. It was an act of propoganda as well as a murder.
Navalny is popular as he is a nationalist, although he has little support outside Moscow. Nemtsov was a nobody, symptomatic of the liberal opposition, who has no support.
Putin is a cautious pragmatist and it really isn't his style. Certainly nothing to gain.
Last line haha.
Putin is an expansionist Nationalist dictator.
Putin's tactics clearly aren't expansionist. Transnistria, Abkazhia and South Ossetia are not being incorporated into the Russian Federation. The only territory actually incorporated to date is Crimea which is historically part of Russia and was until the 1960s. The likelihood is that the Donetsk and Marioupol regions will end up with the same quasi-independent governments already found in the first three examples.
His clear goal is to create a ring of unstable countries around him, probably based on the theory that unstable governments will have difficulty joining or co-operating with NATO and would be less acceptable allies to NATO.
And of course he is a Nationalist. Can you find a single world leader that is not?
It might be better to call him an imperialist. The technique of creating exclaves loyal to your state tho' not necessarily part of your country is how Ireland got colonised by us and the West was won by the USA. It's good technique.
If I recall correctly from his last visit to the UK, Putin sees (Oliver) Cromwell in a positive light. I think he learnt the lesson well...
PEOPLE from poor backgrounds will get similar protection from discrimination as those from ethnic minorities if Labour wins power.
A legal duty forcing public bodies to help reduce inequality caused by class will be resurrected as part of plans to improve social mobility.
The measure in the Equality Act — called “Harman’s law” because it was championed by the deputy Labour leader, Harriet Harman — was scrapped after the 2010 election when Theresa May, the home secretary, branded it a bureaucratic box-ticking exercise.
What nonsense is this?! I know that some ideas can seem good at first glance but on reflection are clearly idiotic, and therefore that the reverse is possible in theory, but that seems particularly ludicrous. I don't even see how it even helps politically.
One thing is clear, the amount of red tape of a Ed government is just going to get worse and worse. Glad my main business operates from elsewhere.
PEOPLE from poor backgrounds will get similar protection from discrimination as those from ethnic minorities if Labour wins power.
A legal duty forcing public bodies to help reduce inequality caused by class will be resurrected as part of plans to improve social mobility.
The measure in the Equality Act — called “Harman’s law” because it was championed by the deputy Labour leader, Harriet Harman — was scrapped after the 2010 election when Theresa May, the home secretary, branded it a bureaucratic box-ticking exercise.
* UKIP and SNP don't want to overthrow the system, just take power within it (or a duplicate) * UKIP and SNP politicians are humans with human flaws.
Neither of those points are absurd
You are being utterly absurd if you do not realise the redistribution of power that both parties demand will significantly change the nature of government in this country. if that is maintaining the status quo you need that surgeon As for the rest of your purile abusive post that was just moronic. Now enough. I can no longer be bothered with you tonight...
I didn't say it was maintaining the status quo. I did say it was maintaining the system. The system in question is - a head of state delegates authority to an executive who rules in its name, in accordance with laws that cannot be changed without inspection and agreement of a popularly-elected legislature. Neither UKIP nor the SNP plan to create a system that works differently.
* UKIP and SNP don't want to overthrow the system, just take power within it (or a duplicate) * UKIP and SNP politicians are humans with human flaws.
Neither of those points are absurd
Obviously UKIP are as much a part of the Establishment as the Tories and Labour are, just wanting their place at the trough.
But the idea the SNP are in any way like the Establishment parties when their sole aim is to end the Establishment and dissolve the United Kingdom is farcical.
The Institutions of the Trough are embodies in the United Kingdom and die with it. While Scotland may end up recreating them, that will be nothing to do with the aims of the SNP and merely down to human incompetence.
My understanding was that SNP want to create a copy of the present system (a head of state delegates authority to an executive who rules in its name, in accordance with laws that cannot be changed without inspection and agreement of a popularly-elected legislature), and retain the existing head of state. The difference would be in detail (a different executive, a different legislature, a new country independent of the UK), not in structure. Is the SNP proposing a written constitution that cannot be changed except via plebiscite? That would be significantly different.
* UKIP and SNP don't want to overthrow the system, just take power within it (or a duplicate) * UKIP and SNP politicians are humans with human flaws.
Neither of those points are absurd
Obviously UKIP are as much a part of the Establishment as the Tories and Labour are, just wanting their place at the trough.
But the idea the SNP are in any way like the Establishment parties when their sole aim is to end the Establishment and dissolve the United Kingdom is farcical.
The Institutions of the Trough are embodies in the United Kingdom and die with it. While Scotland may end up recreating them, that will be nothing to do with the aims of the SNP and merely down to human incompetence.
Utterly deluded. If you want to know who is more of a threat to the establishment, look which one the establishment fights hardest against. Your people lost control of their bodily fluids over a bit of negative press during the referendum - UKIP have endured a concerted multi-channel smear campaign aimed at making voting for them or even talking about them totally socially unacceptable. When have your supporters been publicly called 'fruitcakes loonies and closet racists' by the Prime Minister? When have foster kids been taken away from your members? When has a propaganda docudrama against you been screened? When have the papers been censored for pro-SNP content (as happened this morning to UKIP)?
Quite the contrary, regional nationalisms (with the exception of English nationalism obviously) have been fostered by the establishment (by which I mean the the broader internationalist establishment - you may be obsessed by London but believe it or not it spreads further) over a period of decades, and funded to match. Which is probably why you were so surprised when you got a media duffing up.
As for the trough, the largest trough (in Brussels) is the one your previous leader wished to deny Scots a referendum on was it not?
Comments
Clearly by people who disliked his anti-Putanism, and felt the threat of tommorows Pro-Ukranian rally.
It was to indimidate protesters to Russias war on the Ukraine. To intimidate other Russians.
Putins powerbase is the kleptocracy and the Russian rednecks. There is a lot of internal opposition to Putin.
This murder was an expression of weakness rather than strength.
* UKIP and SNP don't want to overthrow the system, just take power within it (or a duplicate)
* UKIP and SNP politicians are humans with human flaws.
Neither of those points are absurd
Who was our best batsman before the world cup?
James Taylor at 3, what do we do for the world cup? Drop him to 6. Bloody waste
Also backed Ivanovic, Kane and Hazard as FGS, at 20/1, 8/1 and 7/1 respectively.
But the idea the SNP are in any way like the Establishment parties when their sole aim is to end the Establishment and dissolve the United Kingdom is farcical.
The Institutions of the Trough are embodies in the United Kingdom and die with it. While Scotland may end up recreating them, that will be nothing to do with the aims of the SNP and merely down to human incompetence.
I guess final average likely to be 0.7% though obviously dependent on rounding.
PEOPLE from poor backgrounds will get similar protection from discrimination as those from ethnic minorities if Labour wins power.
A legal duty forcing public bodies to help reduce inequality caused by class will be resurrected as part of plans to improve social mobility.
The measure in the Equality Act — called “Harman’s law” because it was championed by the deputy Labour leader, Harriet Harman — was scrapped after the 2010 election when Theresa May, the home secretary, branded it a bureaucratic box-ticking exercise.
If I recall correctly from his last visit to the UK, Putin sees (Oliver) Cromwell in a positive light. I think he learnt the lesson well...
Tory lead 0.2% average of the five YouGovs
Lab lead 1.8% average of the six non-YouGovs.
Quite the contrary, regional nationalisms (with the exception of English nationalism obviously) have been fostered by the establishment (by which I mean the the broader internationalist establishment - you may be obsessed by London but believe it or not it spreads further) over a period of decades, and funded to match. Which is probably why you were so surprised when you got a media duffing up.
As for the trough, the largest trough (in Brussels) is the one your previous leader wished to deny Scots a referendum on was it not?