It certainly would! I've seen before (not with Lab) how tensions between cllrs in a group and general party leadership/membership can go bad.
I wonder if it would apply to all Labour groups or just those of a certain size - the group on my local council consists of 3 cllrs, at least 2 of whom have publicly slated one of the others.
Of course I filed it in the large black filing cabinet
Still would be a bargain if it was my kind of thing
Have the print media really gone this big on discounting. Incredible
I'm surprised anyone buys the Guardian with it being free online.
Perhaps being seen to have a print copy brings a certain social cachet in certain circles.
A complete bargain if the Telegraph, the Guardian, the Times, or the FT were written in the way they once were. However they're not - they finish up as second thoughts.
As far as I can see there is no thoughtful reporting of events happening anywhere now (I'll admit the occasional stray thing by the BBC).
I would happily pay ten times as much for a newspaper that rewarded me in its reading.
That quoting is, surprise surprise, somewhat selective. And from early 2017.
If you haven't watched it, can thoroughly recommend - it was a really good programme, and the US ambassador seems a very interesting chap. So pro business.
Are you expect quoting *in* context from William?
There would have been all sorts of similar doomsday analysis in boardrooms all over the past 2 years.
Far too many well-paid analysts didn’t challenge their underlying modelling assumptions.
The most pertinent comment was about the political nature of the negotiations - that this isn't a negotiation of equals, but a set of choices for the UK that range from less good to very bad.
It’s a negotiation of 1/6th to one that’s playing out more as 1:2 in reality.
He's doing a poor job of it - he improved their position last time and depending what happens with Brexit and the Tories, it's not absurd to think he could manage it despite everything.
That quoting is, surprise surprise, somewhat selective. And from early 2017.
If you haven't watched it, can thoroughly recommend - it was a really good programme, and the US ambassador seems a very interesting chap. So pro business.
Are you expect quoting *in* context from William?
There would have been all sorts of similar doomsday analysis in boardrooms all over the past 2 years.
Far too many well-paid analysts didn’t challenge their underlying modelling assumptions.
Brexit’s favourite economist Patrick Minford is certainly questioning his underlying model. He now concedes Brexit is damaging the economy and agrees he was perhaps a little optimistic.
She is a bloody idiot and seems to be far more interested in her own chances of succeeding May than in making any sort of success of the current Government.
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Of course I filed it in the large black filing cabinet
Still would be a bargain if it was my kind of thing
Have the print media really gone this big on discounting. Incredible
I'm surprised anyone buys the Guardian with it being free online.
Perhaps being seen to have a print copy brings a certain social cachet in certain circles.
A complete bargain if the Telegraph, the Guardian, the Times, or the FT were written in the way they once were. However they're not - they finish up as second thoughts.
As far as I can see there is no thoughtful reporting of events happening anywhere now (I'll admit the occasional stray thing by the BBC).
I would happily pay ten times as much for a newspaper that rewarded me in its reading.
Indeed.
There's an absence of good quality reporting and proper investigative journalism.
I can get as many 'opinions' as I want free online.
That quoting is, surprise surprise, somewhat selective. And from early 2017.
If you haven't watched it, can thoroughly recommend - it was a really good programme, and the US ambassador seems a very interesting chap. So pro business.
Are you expect quoting *in* context from William?
There would have been all sorts of similar doomsday analysis in boardrooms all over the past 2 years.
Far too many well-paid analysts didn’t challenge their underlying modelling assumptions.
Brexit’s favourite economist Patrick Minford is certainly questioning his underlying model. He now concedes Brexit is damaging the economy and agrees he was perhaps a little optimistic.
It’s only Russian trolls and numpties now pleading the case for Brexit.
Do you have a link?. Genuinely interested to to read what he has to say
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Is it perhaps because they are coming from our near neighbours?
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Because it gives rich people in upper middle class safety zones a feeling of moral superiority.
With that side effect of damaging those proles they so hate.
Let me guess your aerial shot is nowhere near where you live.
Based on the aerial shot, no one does. The farmer might be annoyed though. Just pointing out it was factually incorrect to say that there was no space.
I suspect the actual issue is one of timings for compulsory purchase. If the government had started in - say - 2016 there would be no problem. But with just nine months to go ...
Of course I filed it in the large black filing cabinet
Still would be a bargain if it was my kind of thing
Have the print media really gone this big on discounting. Incredible
I'm surprised anyone buys the Guardian with it being free online.
Perhaps being seen to have a print copy brings a certain social cachet in certain circles.
A complete bargain if the Telegraph, the Guardian, the Times, or the FT were written in the way they once were. However they're not - they finish up as second thoughts.
As far as I can see there is no thoughtful reporting of events happening anywhere now (I'll admit the occasional stray thing by the BBC).
I would happily pay ten times as much for a newspaper that rewarded me in its reading.
Indeed.
There's an absence of good quality reporting and proper investigative journalism.
I can get as many 'opinions' as I want free online.
(Just as an aside I'd recommend the works of James Cameron (1911-85). If anyone knows similar well written historical journalism I'd be indebted to them for their suggestions.)
Can anyone point to a recent well-written newspaper article? (Ideally a daily newspaper)
That quoting is, surprise surprise, somewhat selective. And from early 2017.
If you haven't watched it, can thoroughly recommend - it was a really good programme, and the US ambassador seems a very interesting chap. So pro business.
Are you expect quoting *in* context from William?
There would have been all sorts of similar doomsday analysis in boardrooms all over the past 2 years.
Far too many well-paid analysts didn’t challenge their underlying modelling assumptions.
Brexit’s favourite economist Patrick Minford is certainly questioning his underlying model. He now concedes Brexit is damaging the economy and agrees he was perhaps a little optimistic.
It’s only Russian trolls and numpties now pleading the case for Brexit.
Do you have a link?. Genuinely interested to to read what he has to say
SPOTY market on Betfair has Kane 2.78/2.9. About the only thing I know about football is that it is popular, but it occurred to me that Kane has plenty of opportunities to mess up and as such is perhaps too short?
That quoting is, surprise surprise, somewhat selective. And from early 2017.
If you haven't watched it, can thoroughly recommend - it was a really good programme, and the US ambassador seems a very interesting chap. So pro business.
Are you expect quoting *in* context from William?
There would have been all sorts of similar doomsday analysis in boardrooms all over the past 2 years.
Far too many well-paid analysts didn’t challenge their underlying modelling assumptions.
Brexit’s favourite economist Patrick Minford is certainly questioning his underlying model. He now concedes Brexit is damaging the economy and agrees he was perhaps a little optimistic.
It’s only Russian trolls and numpties now pleading the case for Brexit.
Do you have a link?. Genuinely interested to to read what he has to say
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Is it perhaps because they are coming from our near neighbours?
It’s a long boat ride from Algeria to America.
Nigeria is not a near neighbour. Nor is sub-Saharan Africa. Nor is Pakistan or Afghanistan.
And, in any case, we don’t owe neighbours the right for them to come into our homes. Europe simply cannot - and should not - take everyone who wants to come. And plenty of asylum seekers have passed any number of safe countries on the way so are no more than migrants.
There are plenty of countries which are far closer neighbours who have taken zero migrants or asylum seekers. Let them do far more rather than expecting Europe to become the destination of choice.
SPOTY market on Betfair has Kane 2.78/2.9. About the only thing I know about football is that it is popular, but it occurred to me that Kane has plenty of opportunities to mess up and as such is perhaps too short?
Hmm.. He is on penalties so could definitely win it even if we're we're k out at QF stage say.
SPOTY market on Betfair has Kane 2.78/2.9. About the only thing I know about football is that it is popular, but it occurred to me that Kane has plenty of opportunities to mess up and as such is perhaps too short?
Or the England team have plenty of opportunities to mess up.
There's only been 5 footballers win SPOTY compared with 17 athletes.
That quoting is, surprise surprise, somewhat selective. And from early 2017.
If you haven't watched it, can thoroughly recommend - it was a really good programme, and the US ambassador seems a very interesting chap. So pro business.
Are you expect quoting *in* context from William?
There would have been all sorts of similar doomsday analysis in boardrooms all over the past 2 years.
Far too many well-paid analysts didn’t challenge their underlying modelling assumptions.
Brexit’s favourite economist Patrick Minford is certainly questioning his underlying model. He now concedes Brexit is damaging the economy and agrees he was perhaps a little optimistic.
It’s only Russian trolls and numpties now pleading the case for Brexit.
Do you have a link?. Genuinely interested to to read what he has to say
Time to call out the “alt right” for what they really are.
Count Danukula and Sargon have had fairly high profile disagreements with the so-called alt-right, they identify as classical liberals as does Watson. Milo is a loudmouth and a provocateur but no worse than, say, our own SeanT.
My understanding of the bunch is that they identify strongly with individual liberty and freedom of speech - I have less time for Milo and to an extent Watson, but to describe any of them as "fascist" is inaccurate. They are small state classical liberals who believe in strong borders and individual rights, though Milo is of course a troll who will say anything to get attention.
SPOTY market on Betfair has Kane 2.78/2.9. About the only thing I know about football is that it is popular, but it occurred to me that Kane has plenty of opportunities to mess up and as such is perhaps too short?
Hmm.. He is on penalties so could definitely win it even if we're we're k out at QF stage say.
Even Linekar didn't win in 1986 despite being the top scorer although Kenny Dalglish did come third.
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Is it perhaps because they are coming from our near neighbours?
It’s a long boat ride from Algeria to America.
Nigeria is not a near neighbour. Nor is sub-Saharan Africa. Nor is Pakistan or Afghanistan.
And, in any case, we don’t owe neighbours the right for them to come into our homes. Europe simply cannot - and should not - take everyone who wants to come. And plenty of asylum seekers have passed any number of safe countries on the way so are no more than migrants.
There are plenty of countries which are far closer neighbours who have taken zero migrants or asylum seekers. Let them do far more rather than expecting Europe to become the destination of choice.
Your original post was moaning that other parts of the world (America, SE Asia) were not doing their part. No one is talking about “owing neighbours a right to come into our homes”, quite the reverse given the growth of far right influence across Europe.
You seem to be going all Richard Littlejohn now that you are self-employed.
Of course I filed it in the large black filing cabinet
Still would be a bargain if it was my kind of thing
Have the print media really gone this big on discounting. Incredible
I'm surprised anyone buys the Guardian with it being free online.
Perhaps being seen to have a print copy brings a certain social cachet in certain circles.
A complete bargain if the Telegraph, the Guardian, the Times, or the FT were written in the way they once were. However they're not - they finish up as second thoughts.
As far as I can see there is no thoughtful reporting of events happening anywhere now (I'll admit the occasional stray thing by the BBC).
I would happily pay ten times as much for a newspaper that rewarded me in its reading.
Indeed.
There's an absence of good quality reporting and proper investigative journalism.
I can get as many 'opinions' as I want free online.
(Just as an aside I'd recommend the works of James Cameron (1911-85). If anyone knows similar well written historical journalism I'd be indebted to them for their suggestions.)
Can anyone point to a recent well-written newspaper article? (Ideally a daily newspaper)
James Cameron is well worth reading. A very fine journalist.
Norman Lewis is also well worth reading: his books on Italy, Spain before mass tourism and Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia before the Vietnam war are outstanding. A mixture of travel and journalism. But he was a very acute observer and wonderful writer. He travelled with Don McCullin and following travels to Brazil helped set up Survival to fight the cause of indigenous tribes. If you can get hold of his autobiography - Jackdaw Cake (now out of print) do read. Wonderfully eccentric and funny.
Time to call out the “alt right” for what they really are.
Count Danukula and Sargon have had fairly high profile disagreements with the so-called alt-right, they identify as classical liberals as does Watson. Milo is a loudmouth and a provocateur but no worse than, say, our own SeanT.
My understanding of the bunch is that they identify strongly with individual liberty and freedom of speech - I have less time for Milo and to an extent Watson, but to describe any of them as "fascist" is inaccurate. They are small state classical liberals who believe in strong borders and individual rights, though Milo is of course a troll who will say anything to get attention.
Get with the programme.
Fascists don’t call themselves fascists, and of course they pretend to defend freedom of speech, while using those freedoms to attack minorities, immigrants, the “establishment”, and the left.
It’s sad to see it enter mainstream political discourse.
SPOTY market on Betfair has Kane 2.78/2.9. About the only thing I know about football is that it is popular, but it occurred to me that Kane has plenty of opportunities to mess up and as such is perhaps too short?
Hmm.. He is on penalties so could definitely win it even if we're we're k out at QF stage say.
Even Linekar didn't win in 1986 despite being the top scorer although Kenny Dalglish did come third.
Hah I was thinking about the golden boot market lol
Froome should definitely win it if he collects a 5th TdF, though he never seems to poll well. Mind you I thought the same about Farah.
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Is it perhaps because they are coming from our near neighbours?
It’s a long boat ride from Algeria to America.
Nigeria is not a near neighbour. Nor is sub-Saharan Africa. Nor is Pakistan or Afghanistan.
And, in any case, we don’t owe neighbours the right for them to come into our homes. Europe simply cannot - and should not - take everyone who wants to come. And plenty of asylum seekers have passed any number of safe countries on the way so are no more than migrants.
There are plenty of countries which are far closer neighbours who have taken zero migrants or asylum seekers. Let them do far more rather than expecting Europe to become the destination of choice.
Your original post was moaning that other parts of the world (America, SE Asia) were not doing their part. No one is talking about “owing neighbours a right to come into our homes”, quite the reverse given the growth of far right influence across Europe.
You seem to be going all Richard Littlejohn now that you are self-employed.
Other parts of the world far closer to these countries are not doing their part, as well as countries like the US. I simply question the assumptions that anyone who wants to come to Europe from anywhere in the world should be helped to do so, which seem to underlie the interventions of people like David Miliband.
Or do you think that there should be open borders into Europe? And, if not, what is your limit on numbers and types?
I don’t think there should be open borders into Europe and have held these views for some considerable time - as my very first thread header on immigration in early 2016 made clear. Not sure what my employment status has to do with anything.
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Because it gives rich people in upper middle class safety zones a feeling of moral superiority.
With that side effect of damaging those proles they so hate.
At what point do the rich people intervene to persuade the migrants to come to Europe rather than India or China?
Time to call out the “alt right” for what they really are.
Count Danukula and Sargon have had fairly high profile disagreements with the so-called alt-right, they identify as classical liberals as does Watson. Milo is a loudmouth and a provocateur but no worse than, say, our own SeanT.
My understanding of the bunch is that they identify strongly with individual liberty and freedom of speech - I have less time for Milo and to an extent Watson, but to describe any of them as "fascist" is inaccurate. They are small state classical liberals who believe in strong borders and individual rights, though Milo is of course a troll who will say anything to get attention.
Get with the programme.
Fascists don’t call themselves fascists, and of course they pretend to defend freedom of speech, while using those freedoms to attack minorities, immigrants, the “establishment”, and the left....
Quite. Claiming to stand up for your own right to be a jerk, and worse, is not in any way ‘defending’ free speech.
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Is it perhaps because they are coming from our near neighbours?
It’s a long boat ride from Algeria to America.
Your original post was moaning that other parts of the world (America, SE Asia) were not doing their part. No one is talking about “owing neighbours a right to come into our homes”, quite the reverse given the growth of far right influence across Europe.
You seem to be going all Richard Littlejohn now that you are self-employed.
Other parts of the world far closer to these countries are not doing their part, as well as countries like the US. I simply question the assumptions that anyone who wants to come to Europe from anywhere in the world should be helped to do so, which seem to underlie the interventions of people like David Miliband.
Or do you think that there should be open borders into Europe? And, if not, what is your limit on numbers and types?
I don’t think there should be open borders into Europe and have held these views for some considerable time - as my very first thread header on immigration in early 2016 made clear. Not sure what my employment status has to do with anything.
I am no particular fan of David Miliband. Quite the reverse. I have always been mystified by his alleged “appeal”.
Nevertheless, you are mischaracterising his argument. He is not - (and I am not) - calling for open borders. By suggesting as such you are just feeding the populist trolls.
Of course I filed it in the large black filing cabinet
Still would be a bargain if it was my kind of thing
Have the print media really gone this big on discounting. Incredible
I'm surprised anyone buys the Guardian with it being free online.
Perhaps being seen to have a print copy brings a certain social cachet in certain circles.
A complete bargain if the Telegraph, the Guardian, the Times, or the FT were written in the way they once were. However they're not - they finish up as second thoughts.
As far as I can see there is no thoughtful reporting of events happening anywhere now (I'll admit the occasional stray thing by the BBC).
I would happily pay ten times as much for a newspaper that rewarded me in its reading.
Indeed.
There's an absence of good quality reporting and proper investigative journalism.
I can get as many 'opinions' as I want free online.
(Just as an aside I'd recommend the works of James Cameron (1911-85). If anyone knows similar well written historical journalism I'd be indebted to them for their suggestions.)
Can anyone point to a recent well-written newspaper article? (Ideally a daily newspaper)
James Cameron is well worth reading. A very fine journalist.
Norman Lewis is also well worth reading: his books on Italy, Spain before mass tourism and Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia before the Vietnam war are outstanding. A mixture of travel and journalism. But he was a very acute observer and wonderful writer. He travelled with Don McCullin and following travels to Brazil helped set up Survival to fight the cause of indigenous tribes. If you can get hold of his autobiography - Jackdaw Cake (now out of print) do read. Wonderfully eccentric and funny.
Thanks very much Mr Cf. I've acquired 'Jackdaw Cake' on my Kindle. I'll let you know how I find it.
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
I am fond of Africa and Africans and have many friends there, but the current people smuggling is the exact opposite of a well, managed, planned and humane migration policy from Africa.
The pressure will continue though as the accurate population projections for Africa have forecast that it will match Asia for population by 2100. Nigeria will then be the most populous country in the world, with Zaire, Ethiopia and Tanzania in the top 20 in world.
The best thing would be for the rapid economic growth of some African countries (Mauritius, Botswana, Ghana) to be emulated by others, so that migration pressures lessen. A stop to global warming would be in Africa's and our interest too.
Time to call out the “alt right” for what they really are.
Count Danukula and Sargon have had fairly high profile disagreements with the so-called alt-right, they identify as classical liberals as does Watson. Milo is a loudmouth and a provocateur but no worse than, say, our own SeanT.
My understanding of the bunch is that they identify strongly with individual liberty and freedom of speech - I have less time for Milo and to an extent Watson, but to describe any of them as "fascist" is inaccurate. They are small state classical liberals who believe in strong borders and individual rights, though Milo is of course a troll who will say anything to get attention.
Get with the programme.
Fascists don’t call themselves fascists, and of course they pretend to defend freedom of speech, while using those freedoms to attack minorities, immigrants, the “establishment”, and the left.
It’s sad to see it enter mainstream political discourse.
I would listen to what they have to say before judging. Sargon is a pseudo-intellectual who is somewhat close to Jordan Peterson, who I would describe as a traditional conservative, hardly a fascist. Count Dankula is a shock jock by nature with very working class conservative views. Watson is obviously ultra-conservative hiding behind libertarian phraseology but still not a fascist. Milo is, to quote a well known source so not as to get the site in trouble, someone whom “Read up on borderline personality disorder” is sound advice.
The trouble is that statists and left of centre types are trying to shift the overton window by suggesting anyone with classically liberal views are somehow fascist, conflating their brand of personal responsibility and rugged individualism with the *actual* fascists of /pol/, the Andrew Anglins and the Daily Stormer types. When in actual fact the two groups hate each other as much as the Judean People's Front and the People's Front of Judea. The four that have been mentioned are a mix of libertarian and paleo-conservative values, which are in complete opposition to fascism on the libertarian/authoritarian axis.
Time to call out the “alt right” for what they really are.
Count Danukula and Sargon have had fairly high profile disagreements with the so-called alt-right, they identify as classical liberals as does Watson. Milo is a loudmouth and a provocateur but no worse than, say, our own SeanT.
My understanding of the bunch is that they identify strongly with individual liberty and freedom of speech - I have less time for Milo and to an extent Watson, but to describe any of them as "fascist" is inaccurate. They are small state classical liberals who believe in strong borders and individual rights, though Milo is of course a troll who will say anything to get attention.
Get with the programme.
Fascists don’t call themselves fascists, and of course they pretend to defend freedom of speech, while using those freedoms to attack minorities, immigrants, the “establishment”, and the left.
It’s sad to see it enter mainstream political discourse.
I would listen to what they have to say before judging. Sargon is a pseudo-intellectual who is somewhat close to Jordan Peterson, who I would describe as a traditional conservative, hardly a fascist. Count Dankula is a shock jock by nature with very working class conservative views. Watson is obviously ultra-conservative hiding behind libertarian phraseology but still not a fascist. Milo is, to quote a well known source so not as to get the site in trouble, someone whom “Read up on borderline personality disorder” is sound advice.
The trouble is that statists and left of centre types are trying to shift the overton window by suggesting anyone with classically liberal views are somehow fascist, conflating their brand of personal responsibility and rugged individualism with the *actual* fascists of /pol/, the Andrew Anglins and the Daily Stormer types. When in actual fact the two groups hate each other as much as the Judean People's Front and the People's Front of Judea. The four that have been mentioned are a mix of libertarian and paleo-conservative values, which are in complete opposition to fascism on the libertarian/authoritarian axis.
Gardenwalker seems to follow the normal leftist principle that anyone they disagree with on the opposite side of the left right divide must be a fascist. It is a stupid position to take as it undermines the genuine abhorrence people have of real fascists.
Edit: none of which should detract from the fact that Hamilton is an ignorant crooked twat.
Time to call out the “alt right” for what they really are.
Count Danukula and Sargon have had fairly high profile disagreements with the so-called alt-right, they identify as classical liberals as does Watson. Milo is a loudmouth and a provocateur but no worse than, say, our own SeanT.
My understanding of the bunch is that they identify strongly with individual liberty and freedom of speech - I have less time for Milo and to an extent Watson, but to describe any of them as "fascist" is inaccurate. They are small state classical liberals who believe in strong borders and individual rights, though Milo is of course a troll who will say anything to get attention.
Individual liberty and freedom. Come the fuck on.
Dankula has tried to shut down other's speech. The only liberty he cares about is his own. Sargon is a fucking GamerGater.
Time to call out the “alt right” for what they really are.
Count Danukula and Sargon have had fairly high profile disagreements with the so-called alt-right, they identify as classical liberals as does Watson. Milo is a loudmouth and a provocateur but no worse than, say, our own SeanT.
My understanding of the bunch is that they identify strongly with individual liberty and freedom of speech - I have less time for Milo and to an extent Watson, but to describe any of them as "fascist" is inaccurate. They are small state classical liberals who believe in strong borders and individual rights, though Milo is of course a troll who will say anything to get attention.
It’s sad to see it enter mainstream political discourse.
I would listen to what they have to say before judging. Sargon is a pseudo-intellectual who is somewhat close to Jordan Peterson, who I would describe as a traditional conservative, hardly a fascist. Count Dankula is a shock jock by nature with very working class conservative views. Watson is obviously ultra-conservative hiding behind libertarian phraseology but still not a fascist. Milo is, to quote a well known source so not as to get the site in trouble, someone whom “Read up on borderline personality disorder” is sound advice.
The trouble is that statists and left of centre types are trying to shift the overton window by suggesting anyone with classically liberal views are somehow fascist, conflating their brand of personal responsibility and rugged individualism with the *actual* fascists of /pol/, the Andrew Anglins and the Daily Stormer types. When in actual fact the two groups hate each other as much as the Judean People's Front and the People's Front of Judea. The four that have been mentioned are a mix of libertarian and paleo-conservative values, which are in complete opposition to fascism on the libertarian/authoritarian axis.
Sorry, I don’t agree.
Social media has shifted the Overton Window - or rather widened it - to enable extreme voices from both left and right.
Libertarianism was rather popular on campus when I was university. Ron Paul is a libertarian. Libertarianism is a honourable, though in my view, misconceived philosophy.
These guys are common garden fascists. As I say, time to call the alt right what they really are.
Yours sincerely, a life-long conservative (which is to say, not a “statist”).
Why the hell is this Europe’s problem to solve? Why should Europe become the destination for everyone from Africa or Asia or MENA countries? Let America take them or South America or China or India. I am sick of people like him making the assumption that Europe should be automatically the destination of choice for anyone who wants to go there, regardless of the wishes of the existing inhabitants and regardless of whether those wishing to come here have any desirable skills or not.
Because it gives rich people in upper middle class safety zones a feeling of moral superiority.
With that side effect of damaging those proles they so hate.
At what point do the rich people intervene to persuade the migrants to come to Europe rather than India or China?
Do you think the migrants get a welfare state etc in India or China ?
Comments
I wonder if it would apply to all Labour groups or just those of a certain size - the group on my local council consists of 3 cllrs, at least 2 of whom have publicly slated one of the others.
As far as I can see there is no thoughtful reporting of events happening anywhere now (I'll admit the occasional stray thing by the BBC).
I would happily pay ten times as much for a newspaper that rewarded me in its reading.
I’m comfortable with that.
There's an absence of good quality reporting and proper investigative journalism.
I can get as many 'opinions' as I want free online.
It’s a long boat ride from Algeria to America.
"So you believe that the only Mexicans crossing the border are drug dealers and rapists.
You also believe that Mexicans are taking your jobs.
So what exactly is it you do for a living?"
With that side effect of damaging those proles they so hate.
Can anyone point to a recent well-written newspaper article? (Ideally a daily newspaper)
dfafc806-762d-11e8-a8c4-408cfba4327c
And it'll bring up the article for free.
https://twitter.com/neilukip/status/1011671738030182402?s=21
https://twitter.com/noahcrothman/status/1011686656439738370?s=21
They were Central Europe's (ie Germany's) battleground against the Turks for 200 years and then got treated badly as the Austrians advanced.
Though they themselves treated the Slavs and Romanians within their borders badly once they got power.
There's probably all sorts of national insecurities and yearnings behind all their actions.
And, in any case, we don’t owe neighbours the right for them to come into our homes. Europe simply cannot - and should not - take everyone who wants to come. And plenty of asylum seekers have passed any number of safe countries on the way so are no more than migrants.
There are plenty of countries which are far closer neighbours who have taken zero migrants or asylum seekers. Let them do far more rather than expecting Europe to become the destination of choice.
There's only been 5 footballers win SPOTY compared with 17 athletes.
My understanding of the bunch is that they identify strongly with individual liberty and freedom of speech - I have less time for Milo and to an extent Watson, but to describe any of them as "fascist" is inaccurate. They are small state classical liberals who believe in strong borders and individual rights, though Milo is of course a troll who will say anything to get attention.
You seem to be going all Richard Littlejohn now that you are self-employed.
Norman Lewis is also well worth reading: his books on Italy, Spain before mass tourism and Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia before the Vietnam war are outstanding. A mixture of travel and journalism. But he was a very acute observer and wonderful writer. He travelled with Don McCullin and following travels to Brazil helped set up Survival to fight the cause of indigenous tribes. If you can get hold of his autobiography - Jackdaw Cake (now out of print) do read. Wonderfully eccentric and funny.
Being a polite facist is fine with middle America.
Fascists don’t call themselves fascists, and of course they pretend to defend freedom of speech, while using those freedoms to attack minorities, immigrants, the “establishment”, and the left.
It’s sad to see it enter mainstream political discourse.
Froome should definitely win it if he collects a 5th TdF, though he never seems to poll well. Mind you I thought the same about Farah.
Or do you think that there should be open borders into Europe? And, if not, what is your limit on numbers and types?
I don’t think there should be open borders into Europe and have held these views for some considerable time - as my very first thread header on immigration in early 2016 made clear. Not sure what my employment status has to do with anything.
NEW THREAD
Claiming to stand up for your own right to be a jerk, and worse, is not in any way ‘defending’ free speech.
Quite the reverse. I have always been mystified by his alleged “appeal”.
Nevertheless, you are mischaracterising his argument. He is not - (and I am not) - calling for open borders. By suggesting as such you are just feeding the populist trolls.
The pressure will continue though as the accurate population projections for Africa have forecast that it will match Asia for population by 2100. Nigeria will then be the most populous country in the world, with Zaire, Ethiopia and Tanzania in the top 20 in world.
The best thing would be for the rapid economic growth of some African countries (Mauritius, Botswana, Ghana) to be emulated by others, so that migration pressures lessen. A stop to global warming would be in Africa's and our interest too.
The trouble is that statists and left of centre types are trying to shift the overton window by suggesting anyone with classically liberal views are somehow fascist, conflating their brand of personal responsibility and rugged individualism with the *actual* fascists of /pol/, the Andrew Anglins and the Daily Stormer types. When in actual fact the two groups hate each other as much as the Judean People's Front and the People's Front of Judea. The four that have been mentioned are a mix of libertarian and paleo-conservative values, which are in complete opposition to fascism on the libertarian/authoritarian axis.
Edit: none of which should detract from the fact that Hamilton is an ignorant crooked twat.
Dankula has tried to shut down other's speech. The only liberty he cares about is his own. Sargon is a fucking GamerGater.
Social media has shifted the Overton Window - or rather widened it - to enable extreme voices from both left and right.
Libertarianism was rather popular on campus when I was university. Ron Paul is a libertarian. Libertarianism is a honourable, though in my view, misconceived philosophy.
These guys are common garden fascists.
As I say, time to call the alt right what they really are.
Yours sincerely, a life-long conservative (which is to say, not a “statist”).
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/26/donald-trump-harley-davidson-riders-676517