Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Pressure of the Populist Right – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited October 15 in General
The Pressure of the Populist Right – politicalbetting.com

Boris has lost control. pic.twitter.com/1BOER7z4wx

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 3,285
    Alastair's threads are the epitome of narcissistic waffle.

    Can't you stick to political betting, cut out your own self-importance, and make them a third of the length? Make one point and make it well.

    Mike does this brilliantly.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    Talking of the populist right, a glimpse of a possible future.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/last-exit-trump-autocracy/616466/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790
    The audience directly behind Trump are told to wear Trump or MAGA face masks...
    But they're not intelligent enough to realise they ought to put them on properly.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 3,790
    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    From 29th June isn't "in spring".
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901
    Outbreak at a spin class in Canada
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 22,324
    rcs1000 said:

    Well I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Header.

    Me too, and I am a bad tempered, insomniac narcissist.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862
    David Coburn wandered through the Brexit Party, sought but was refused membership of the Conservatives and is currently snuggling in Alliance For Unity alongside George Galloway

    Gee, thanks, antifrank. That didn’t improve the taste of my morning cornflakes.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862
    edited October 15
    Nigelb said:

    Excellent and entertaining header, Alastair.

    Not sure why people get up early to badmouth stuff that by their own account they have neither the attention span or interest in reading.
    I’ll be generous and assume bad tempered insomniac rather than narcissist.

    Don’t know why. The poster in question is not one of distinction.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 31,862
    eristdoof said:

    The audience directly behind Trump are told to wear Trump or MAGA face masks...
    But they're not intelligent enough to realise they ought to put them on properly.
    No Trump supporter nose how to put on a mask properly.

    I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
  • Thanks Alastair, very good.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901
    Since Mike's header was published yesterday where he quoted 11.9 million have voted early in the US that figure has now risen to 16.1 million.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,949
    Nigelb said:

    Talking of the populist right, a glimpse of a possible future.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/last-exit-trump-autocracy/616466/

    And it's not at all at good one.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671
    edited October 15
    A very enjoyable soiree through the Right Wing Populist sects. While it is easy and enjoyable to laugh at the shit throwing monkeys, it only encourages them.

    The problem of the fissiparous right is they really need a cause to hang on, now that they have achieved their precious Brexit. Obviously anti-immigrant prejudice has to be central, but the theme of fighting the threats to our pure, virginal and innocent culture has become the vanguard. Hence the obsession with a fictitious "wokeness" taking over the country. They need to be the imaginary cure for imaginary diseases.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671
    Scott_xP said:
    Leicester half term next week, a week in advance of most of the country, ss getting a bit late to do anything. A ban on travel outside area is probably for the best.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100
    Scott_xP said:
    This is what people ate missing when they poo pooed the idea of a circuit breaker when first mooted a month ago. The later you leave it the longer the lockdown must be to achieve its stated aim.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    This is what people ate missing when they poo pooed the idea of a circuit breaker when first mooted a month ago. The later you leave it the longer the lockdown must be to achieve its stated aim.
    Except if the circuit breaker doesn't solve the problem you're just can kicking and need to do it again, and again, and again.

    Better to find a sustainable way to keep R at 1 or below than that.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 17,100

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    This is what people ate missing when they poo pooed the idea of a circuit breaker when first mooted a month ago. The later you leave it the longer the lockdown must be to achieve its stated aim.
    Except if the circuit breaker doesn't solve the problem you're just can kicking and need to do it again, and again, and again.

    Better to find a sustainable way to keep R at 1 or below than that.
    Well indeed, the only point of the circuit breaker is too come out of it with a different set of restrictions than you went in with.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 4,287
    Circuit breaker or spy-ring breaker?
    "Spies have found it more difficult to trail suspects during the pandemic because of the empty streets caused by lockdown, the director-general of MI5 revealed yesterday." - Telegraph

    Think of all that spycraft going to waste.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 18,671
    edited October 15
    geoffw said:

    Circuit breaker or spy-ring breaker?
    "Spies have found it more difficult to trail suspects during the pandemic because of the empty streets caused by lockdown, the director-general of MI5 revealed yesterday." - Telegraph

    Think of all that spycraft going to waste.

    Cocaine rings are feeling the pinch too.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    An entertaining lead!

    To the story we can add the parties we were promised (or threatened with) that never got done. Alan Sked - the very original founder of UKIp who parted company with his baby long ago - was briefly in the news again a few years ago through some new party he was intending to launch. Arron Banks during the Brexit parliamentary saga was apparently going to pour his money into a new party. And Farage at various times has threatened us with new political entities.

    Once you start with a new party it clearly becomes a habit.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    This is what people ate missing when they poo pooed the idea of a circuit breaker when first mooted a month ago. The later you leave it the longer the lockdown must be to achieve its stated aim.
    Except if the circuit breaker doesn't solve the problem you're just can kicking and need to do it again, and again, and again.

    Better to find a sustainable way to keep R at 1 or below than that.
    Of course it is, but we don't have that sustainable way without keeping schools shut. Some of the ideas Max, Edmund or Nigel promote might work as alternatives but as far as is made public those are not being considered by the government and SAGE, whereas circuit breakers are.

    The local tiers are divisive and create huge uncertainty for businesses and the public. Should I arrange to meet a friend for dinner at the weekend? Well according to the media it will probably be illegal by then, but I have no way of knowing if thats hype or not. Nor do businesses in terms of stock levels, you say its difficult for them to cope with a fixed period of closure but this purgatory is far worse. Once they are in tier 2 or 3 they have minimal govt support, which would change with a national picture as their lobbying would be more powerful.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 61,901
    Looking through the Hunter Biden nonsrnse on twitter, there seems to be perfect correlation between hot takes and whether a user has something like patriot or maga in their description
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    edited October 15
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Excellent and entertaining header, Alastair.

    Not sure why people get up early to badmouth stuff that by their own account they have neither the attention span or interest in reading.
    I’ll be generous and assume bad tempered insomniac rather than narcissist.

    Don’t know why. The poster in question is not one of distinction.
    Foxy said:

    geoffw said:

    Circuit breaker or spy-ring breaker?
    "Spies have found it more difficult to trail suspects during the pandemic because of the empty streets caused by lockdown, the director-general of MI5 revealed yesterday." - Telegraph

    Think of all that spycraft going to waste.

    Cocaine rings are feeling the pinch too.

    There is probably quite a lot of criminal activity that has taken a hit during the crisis. Less burglary as so many more people are at home, and few away in holiday? Fewer fights and mugging without people out and about and without late night drinking?

    I remarked on my Italy trip that it was the first time for decades driving about Italy that I hadn’t spotted any prostitutes standing out on the main roads, and whilst that isn’t illegal there is a lot of criminal activity behind it, not least people trafficking, which must surely be less viable currently.

    It isn’t only ballerinas that might be retraining in cyber.....
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090
    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    It would be sensible, almost necessary for analysis purposes, to make the categories 10-17 and 18-29 rather than 10-19 and 20-29 given the understanding it is university driving most of the cases.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    edited October 15

    Interesting read Mr Meeks.

    Shocking that we have this many replies without someone making a People's Front of Judea gag. Splitters!

    I almost did, one post earlier. But it seemed too easy ;)
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090
    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    Whilst we know its high in the young adult group, it is striking that the rest of the adult working age population is only about 7-10 days behind them.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Excellent and entertaining header, Alastair.

    Not sure why people get up early to badmouth stuff that by their own account they have neither the attention span or interest in reading.
    I’ll be generous and assume bad tempered insomniac rather than narcissist.

    Don’t know why. The poster in question is not one of distinction.
    Foxy said:

    geoffw said:

    Circuit breaker or spy-ring breaker?
    "Spies have found it more difficult to trail suspects during the pandemic because of the empty streets caused by lockdown, the director-general of MI5 revealed yesterday." - Telegraph

    Think of all that spycraft going to waste.

    Cocaine rings are feeling the pinch too.

    There is probably quite a lot of criminal activity that has taken a hit during the crisis. Less burglary as so many more people are at home, and few away in holiday? Fewer fights and mugging without people out and about and without late night drinking?

    I remarked on my Italy trip that it was the first time for decades driving about Italy that I hadn’t spotted any prostitutes standing out on the main roads, and whilst that isn’t illegal there is a lot of criminal activity behind it, not least people trafficking, which must surely be less viable currently.

    It isn’t only ballerinas that might be retraining in cyber.....
    Why bother burgling a house when you can fill in a govt form under multiple identities and get tens of thousands of cash that wont be checked for many months if ever?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 10,428
    edited October 15
    Dems now “favoured” to win the Senate on 538, rather than “slightly favoured”. 🤷‍♂️
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    ydoethur said:

    eristdoof said:

    The audience directly behind Trump are told to wear Trump or MAGA face masks...
    But they're not intelligent enough to realise they ought to put them on properly.
    No Trump supporter nose how to put on a mask properly.

    I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
    That's a story I couldn't face covering.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090
    On topic I think these fringe parties, and those on the extreme left are wholly irrelevant. What matters to the country are the controls the Conservatives and Labour have to stop an insurgent takeover by extremists within, both have failed us greatly on this front in the last decade and it is unclear they have done much to stop it getting worse in the Tories case or happen again in Labours.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    Scott_xP said:
    Is the data really that different from that available on Monday when the government made the opposite decision?
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,000

    Dems now “favoured” to win the Senate on 538, rather than “slightly favoured”. 🤷‍♂️

    Please, goddess of politics, let that be true.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    eristdoof said:

    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    From 29th June isn't "in spring".
    Indeed.
    You’re not looking at the spring figures - this is the lead up to autumn.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953
    London hospitalisations have been pretty flat for about a month. What is the unpublished data that Khan claims to be seeing that challenges that?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090
    Nigelb said:

    eristdoof said:

    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    From 29th June isn't "in spring".
    Indeed.
    You’re not looking at the spring figures - this is the lead up to autumn.
    Nigelb said:

    eristdoof said:

    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    From 29th June isn't "in spring".
    Indeed.
    You’re not looking at the spring figures - this is the lead up to autumn.
    The poster is an Aussie. His spring.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553

    rcs1000 said:

    Well I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Header.

    Me too, and I am a bad tempered, insomniac narcissist.
    Aren’t most of us ?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 3,543
    Nice piece. On one level the populist right just looks like a laughable collection of nut jobs, weirdos and closet racists (and outed racists too of course). On the other hand they effected the most significant political change in Britain in decades - albeit with some help from mainstream right wing politicians - so dismiss them at your peril. They're like a damp patch on your wall - nasty and unsightly, and indicative of a more serious underlying problem that will take time and money to fix. And if you ignore it and hope it just goes away, you will regret it.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    Scott_xP said:
    Actually that's exactly what its supposed to be like.

    "intensifying the battles over the future of the UK" is also known as "taking back control".
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 2,953
    One thought I’ve come to is that England is just too big for (detailed) Covid policy to be directed at a centralised national level. It is fine to set an overall framework - but what works in one area of the country might be completely different in another. In one part of the country the spread might be being focussed in private homes, in another pubs, in another schools in another universities and so on.

    Whilst a national lockdown might have “worked” because it simply targeted everything, any sustainable policy has to be more nuanced and target the causes or spread tailored to local circumstances. And for that there HAS to be more trust placed in local and regional authorities.

    What I also think is that many plausible options get ruled out when directed centrally because the effects are just to large to comprehend that the might be implementable and/or work. For a relatively small group of people trying to get to grips with it. Max’s ideas on self isolation being one such example.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466

    Nigelb said:

    eristdoof said:

    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    From 29th June isn't "in spring".
    Indeed.
    You’re not looking at the spring figures - this is the lead up to autumn.
    Nigelb said:

    eristdoof said:

    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    From 29th June isn't "in spring".
    Indeed.
    You’re not looking at the spring figures - this is the lead up to autumn.
    The poster is an Aussie. His spring.
    I think he means our spring. While the data shows from June onwards, if you replace the word Spring with March (which was Spring) then the sentence makes sense: "In [March] a lot of cases were missed due to poor testing. Older people are hiding from risk now, the lag before they get hit is longer now. See heatmap for Uk, similar Israel"
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763
    Shneur Odze is worth a Google.

    "Odze helped to set up the "Friends of Israel in UKIP", the logo of which featured a pound sign in the centre of a star of David. When it was pointed out that linking Jews and money had unfortunate connotations, Odze said this was more oversight than conspiracy.[7] He condemned the party's policy against religious slaughter as "wrong".[8]"

    That's slaughter of animals for meat BTW. I had to check.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,037
    edited October 15
    I admire Alastair's diligence in tracking these people and even working out who the leaders of UKIP have been but it is wrong to think that this sad bunch of nutters and assorted fruitcakes have any significance, political or otherwise. Or, frankly, that they ever did. Mocking these inadequates is a pretty cheap way of mocking an idea.

    For the avoidance of doubt, I think the title at least is misleading. There is no pressure from the populist right in the UK.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    Might Putin have given up on his bestie ?

    Trump thought he had a nuclear deal with Putin. Not so fast, Russia said.
    https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/10/15/world/trump-nuclear-deal-putin-russia/
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466

    Dems now “favoured” to win the Senate on 538, rather than “slightly favoured”. 🤷‍♂️

    Be careful if bettng is that including Sanders and the other one as Dems? Betfair does not.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 2,053

    On topic I think these fringe parties, and those on the extreme left are wholly irrelevant. What matters to the country are the controls the Conservatives and Labour have to stop an insurgent takeover by extremists within, both have failed us greatly on this front in the last decade and it is unclear they have done much to stop it getting worse in the Tories case or happen again in Labours.

    Not quite irrelevant - their indirect effect in parties trying either to accommodate them or oppose them is considerable.

    BTW is anyone up to date on the current state of the parties on the looney left now that Labour is having another try at social democracy?

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733
    alex_ said:

    One thought I’ve come to is that England is just too big for (detailed) Covid policy to be directed at a centralised national level. It is fine to set an overall framework - but what works in one area of the country might be completely different in another. In one part of the country the spread might be being focussed in private homes, in another pubs, in another schools in another universities and so on.

    Whilst a national lockdown might have “worked” because it simply targeted everything, any sustainable policy has to be more nuanced and target the causes or spread tailored to local circumstances. And for that there HAS to be more trust placed in local and regional authorities.

    What I also think is that many plausible options get ruled out when directed centrally because the effects are just to large to comprehend that the might be implementable and/or work. For a relatively small group of people trying to get to grips with it. Max’s ideas on self isolation being one such example.

    That unherd article I linked to yesterday identified political decentralisation as one of Germany's plusses in responding to the crisis. But ISTM that this arises more from the taking of decisions locally enabling greater speed and joined up local responses, and ability to take communities with them, rather than different policy responses per se. The German approach to testing is a case in point, managed through local public health.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 1,098
    DavidL said:

    I admire Alastair's diligence in tracking these people and even working out who the leaders of UKIP have been but it is wrong to think that this sad bunch of nutters and assorted fruitcakes have any significance, political or otherwise. Or, frankly, that they ever did. Mocking these inadequates is a pretty cheap way of mocking an idea.

    I liked Alastair's article and PB.com has such an interesting range of knowledgeable characters that it is often very illuminating to hear what they have to say. However, I think an article about why people are attracted to these groups (and the populist right) would be more beneficial. The argument of "they are basically racists" is just a lazy one - and also, in the case of the US, weird given many of Trump's supporters in the Rust Belt had voted for Obama previously.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    Foxy said:

    A very enjoyable soiree through the Right Wing Populist sects. While it is easy and enjoyable to laugh at the shit throwing monkeys, it only encourages them.

    The problem of the fissiparous right is they really need a cause to hang on, now that they have achieved their precious Brexit. Obviously anti-immigrant prejudice has to be central, but the theme of fighting the threats to our pure, virginal and innocent culture has become the vanguard. Hence the obsession with a fictitious "wokeness" taking over the country. They need to be the imaginary cure for imaginary diseases.

    Not even necessarily a particular cause.
    The multiplication of parties perhaps suggests that they are just looking for a home. After all, when they find one (as in Trump’s new model Republican party), is there a particular cause ?
  • nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,032
    There are a few on here I would put in the loony right grouping whilst masquerading as conservatives.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 25,553
    edited October 15
    Nigelb said:

    eristdoof said:

    Nigelb said:

    Partially accounts for the current lower death rate / infections.

    From 29th June isn't "in spring".
    Indeed.
    You’re not looking at the spring figures - this is the lead up to autumn.
    The poster is an Aussie. His spring.

    Now I’m just confused.

    (and have messed up the blockquotes)
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466

    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    This is what people ate missing when they poo pooed the idea of a circuit breaker when first mooted a month ago. The later you leave it the longer the lockdown must be to achieve its stated aim.
    Except if the circuit breaker doesn't solve the problem you're just can kicking and need to do it again, and again, and again.

    Better to find a sustainable way to keep R at 1 or below than that.
    Of course it is, but we don't have that sustainable way without keeping schools shut. Some of the ideas Max, Edmund or Nigel promote might work as alternatives but as far as is made public those are not being considered by the government and SAGE, whereas circuit breakers are.

    The local tiers are divisive and create huge uncertainty for businesses and the public. Should I arrange to meet a friend for dinner at the weekend? Well according to the media it will probably be illegal by then, but I have no way of knowing if thats hype or not. Nor do businesses in terms of stock levels, you say its difficult for them to cope with a fixed period of closure but this purgatory is far worse. Once they are in tier 2 or 3 they have minimal govt support, which would change with a national picture as their lobbying would be more powerful.
    The Tiers are at least more honest, the areas put into Tier 3 are being told it is for a minimum of 4 weeks - not this "2 weeks" circuit break that anyone honest knows would never be 2 weeks.

    As for whether we have a sustainable way of doing that or not, I think its too early to tell. We've already got R falling week after week recently since priority went back into reducing R and the "back to the office to save Pret" idiocy was dropped. Doubling time has gone from 7 days to probably now being 13 days and its still falling and that's before Tier 3 was introduced. We could be hitting the second wave peak about now.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 77,818
    The Latest Yougov has the Brexit Party on 3%, a slight increase on the 2% they got at the last general election and 6% of 2019 Tory voters now backing Farage's Party so they have not gone away.
    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/do0j3t84jg/TheTimes_VI_Tracker_201006.pdf

    If Boris introduces another national lockdown or if concedes to the EU on fishing and state aid in order to get a trade deal with the EU there will likely be some further seepage from the Tories to the Brexit Party too
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763
    MrEd said:

    DavidL said:

    I admire Alastair's diligence in tracking these people and even working out who the leaders of UKIP have been but it is wrong to think that this sad bunch of nutters and assorted fruitcakes have any significance, political or otherwise. Or, frankly, that they ever did. Mocking these inadequates is a pretty cheap way of mocking an idea.

    I liked Alastair's article and PB.com has such an interesting range of knowledgeable characters that it is often very illuminating to hear what they have to say. However, I think an article about why people are attracted to these groups (and the populist right) would be more beneficial. The argument of "they are basically racists" is just a lazy one - and also, in the case of the US, weird given many of Trump's supporters in the Rust Belt had voted for Obama previously.
    Hopelessness and the belief that only physical violence will produce change. Also the reason for militant Islam.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,037
    MrEd said:

    DavidL said:

    I admire Alastair's diligence in tracking these people and even working out who the leaders of UKIP have been but it is wrong to think that this sad bunch of nutters and assorted fruitcakes have any significance, political or otherwise. Or, frankly, that they ever did. Mocking these inadequates is a pretty cheap way of mocking an idea.

    I liked Alastair's article and PB.com has such an interesting range of knowledgeable characters that it is often very illuminating to hear what they have to say. However, I think an article about why people are attracted to these groups (and the populist right) would be more beneficial. The argument of "they are basically racists" is just a lazy one - and also, in the case of the US, weird given many of Trump's supporters in the Rust Belt had voted for Obama previously.
    Alastair writes very well and I enjoy his erudition. I just don't think that UKIP's weird gyrations is a particularly useful topic.

    The alienation of so many from a society that rejects their values and rejects them is interesting. I know you feel differently but for me the remarkable thing is that 40 odd percent of those Americans who do manage to vote will vote for Trump. Rather than condemning it would be useful to ask why anyone would do this and what it is going to take to heal the divisions in their society that represents.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 37,468

    Scott_xP said:
    Actually that's exactly what its supposed to be like.

    "intensifying the battles over the future of the UK" is also known as "taking back control".
    It's quite funny how opponents have now moved onto a Trade Deal being bad, as they know we're going to get one, but wilfully blind to the fact we'd have stayed in a "push - pull" dynamic even if we'd stayed in the EU too.

    It's called international relations.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 77,818
    MrEd said:

    DavidL said:

    I admire Alastair's diligence in tracking these people and even working out who the leaders of UKIP have been but it is wrong to think that this sad bunch of nutters and assorted fruitcakes have any significance, political or otherwise. Or, frankly, that they ever did. Mocking these inadequates is a pretty cheap way of mocking an idea.

    I liked Alastair's article and PB.com has such an interesting range of knowledgeable characters that it is often very illuminating to hear what they have to say. However, I think an article about why people are attracted to these groups (and the populist right) would be more beneficial. The argument of "they are basically racists" is just a lazy one - and also, in the case of the US, weird given many of Trump's supporters in the Rust Belt had voted for Obama previously.
    The difference in the US though is Trump leads the Republican Party, the main right of centre party there, most of the main populist parties in Europe eg National Rally, Vox, the Swedish Democrats, Party for Freedom, Lega Nord, the AfD and of course UKIP and the Brexit Party are to the right of the main centre right party (though Lega is now in coalition with Forza Italia) and the same is true in Australia with the One Nation Party or New Zealand with New Zealand First
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 27,817
    For those who think taxing international companies and entrepreneurs is enough of a headache, wait until we have to start dealing with a rise in the number of people who can live anywhere whilst employed and remote working.

    https://www.thenationalnews.com/uae/government/dubai-moves-to-attract-world-s-remote-workers-with-new-residency-programme-1.1093699
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090

    The asylum system is broken. It was designed for another age, is full of loopholes and is ripe for abuse - and, indeed, is being abused.

    Absolute numbers this year are only part of it - we had record numbers infiltrating across the channel as well (4 times what they were the previous year) and there's nothing to stop it increasing still further next year. People are worried it'll continue to spiral out of control and the images we've seen on our TV screens this summer provide a very visceral example of our inability to adequately control our borders.

    If centrists want to defeat the populist right then they need to come up with practical solutions that address this - not just put their fingers in their ears and assert ever more loudly that There Is No Problem. They tried that (and changing the subject) with the EU too and look where that got them. It's the voters that decide what's important to them and what needs addressing.

    And it can be done: David Cameron got the closest I've seen for any PM with his thoughtful asylum policy. He abjectly failed with free movement (another example of centrist extremism - yes, ideologues exist there too) but he did - eventually - wake up to the issue.

    Farage will pop up again if Boris doesn't own and grip this issue. Otherwise he will forever stay in the shadows.

    The first step is for government to fund the courts. Implementing hundreds of new laws each year whilst cutting spending on courts by 25% over the last decade inevitably results in poor outcomes. Make the number of laws the govt can introduce proportional to the court spending and we would see better outcomes and fewer, better, clearer laws.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505
    Interesting morning header. As a minor aside, iirc Alliance For Unity has been refused permission to use that name by Electoral Commission.

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 3,763

    Nice piece. On one level the populist right just looks like a laughable collection of nut jobs, weirdos and closet racists (and outed racists too of course). On the other hand they effected the most significant political change in Britain in decades - albeit with some help from mainstream right wing politicians - so dismiss them at your peril. They're like a damp patch on your wall - nasty and unsightly, and indicative of a more serious underlying problem that will take time and money to fix. And if you ignore it and hope it just goes away, you will regret it.

    Wouldn't have happened without a treacherous sellout by the left, so stop being partisan about it. The right wing politicians were up front about being shits and were doing the job they were elected to do. Corbyn otoh...
  • felixfelix Posts: 10,982
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    eristdoof said:

    The audience directly behind Trump are told to wear Trump or MAGA face masks...
    But they're not intelligent enough to realise they ought to put them on properly.
    No Trump supporter nose how to put on a mask properly.

    I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
    That's a story I couldn't face covering.
    Cheeky!
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 2,053
    I wonder if Mr Meeks - thank you for an excellent article yet again - is expecting too much of SKS. His party had been firmly placed on the same list as the BNP, SWP, UKIP, CPGB, Trump, Kim Jong-un etc as absolutely to be voted against in every and all circumstances by millions of centrist voters with well known results

    For proper left of centre people this must be a lasting cause of shame, for ordinary centrists this must leave serious question marks as to the balance and sanity of the Labour party as a whole. It isn't long ago that people in the party were suggesting that Richard Burgon, Dawn Butler, Laura Pidcock were serious future contenders for leader, and therefore Prime Minister.

    The thing in SKS' favour is that a range of insoluble problems have to be cracked by someone else. As they are insoluble SKS' solutions are neither better or worse than anyone else's. He may as well devote himself to organising the fascist left out of the party, dealing with anti Semitism and telling us that he isn't Corbyn. He can do light training by pointing out the errors of government as they tackle insoluble problems.

    One day he will have to draft a manifesto. It will be studied with care. But not now.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 30,061
    Scott_xP said:
    They really are stupid, bribes to their chums will make no difference now.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 37,468
    IanB2 said:

    An entertaining lead!

    To the story we can add the parties we were promised (or threatened with) that never got done. Alan Sked - the very original founder of UKIp who parted company with his baby long ago - was briefly in the news again a few years ago through some new party he was intending to launch. Arron Banks during the Brexit parliamentary saga was apparently going to pour his money into a new party. And Farage at various times has threatened us with new political entities.

    Once you start with a new party it clearly becomes a habit.

    First they ignore you, then laugh at you, then they fight you.. then you win.

    We've gone from "win" (2016) back to ignoring and laughing, which is where we were in the late 90s/ early 00s, but we shouldn't forget what's happened next.

    If you want to keep laughing (or ignoring) the populist right then centrist parties need to address the issues that mobilise voters around them or they'll be doomed to relive the same experiences all over again - or worse. Just shouting more loudly that they're wrong and you don't agree won't do it.

    The reason I keep saying centrists are like the Bourbons is that I don't see much evidence they've learn anything or forgotten anything from the last five years. So I'm not overly hopeful although I pray there is at least some cognitive diversity and intelligence out there.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 6,407
    Nice thread header. Didn't see that last paragraph coming - but it's a fair point.
    Starmer is picking his battles. He's sidestepped on Brexit, statues and the other attempts from the Tories to start a culture war.

    And he's chosen his ground on a circuit breaker lockdown, where he is backed by scientific advice, public opinion and the strong likelihood that Boris will end up having to introduce a lockdown policy soon.

  • felixfelix Posts: 10,982
    MrEd said:

    DavidL said:

    I admire Alastair's diligence in tracking these people and even working out who the leaders of UKIP have been but it is wrong to think that this sad bunch of nutters and assorted fruitcakes have any significance, political or otherwise. Or, frankly, that they ever did. Mocking these inadequates is a pretty cheap way of mocking an idea.

    I liked Alastair's article and PB.com has such an interesting range of knowledgeable characters that it is often very illuminating to hear what they have to say. However, I think an article about why people are attracted to these groups (and the populist right) would be more beneficial. The argument of "they are basically racists" is just a lazy one - and also, in the case of the US, weird given many of Trump's supporters in the Rust Belt had voted for Obama previously.
    Of course calling them racist, loony, nutjobs, etc is lazy but it also saves the critics from questioning any of their own beliefs or the issues in question.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,037

    The asylum system is broken. It was designed for another age, is full of loopholes and is ripe for abuse - and, indeed, is being abused.

    Absolute numbers this year are only part of it - we had record numbers infiltrating across the channel as well (4 times what they were the previous year) and there's nothing to stop it increasing still further next year. People are worried it'll continue to spiral out of control and the images we've seen on our TV screens this summer provide a very visceral example of our inability to adequately control our borders.

    If centrists want to defeat the populist right then they need to come up with practical solutions that address this - not just put their fingers in their ears and assert ever more loudly that There Is No Problem. They tried that (and changing the subject) with the EU too and look where that got them. It's the voters that decide what's important to them and what needs addressing.

    And it can be done: David Cameron got the closest I've seen for any PM with his thoughtful asylum policy. He abjectly failed with free movement (another example of centrist extremism - yes, ideologues exist there too) but he did - eventually - wake up to the issue.

    Farage will pop up again if Boris doesn't own and grip this issue. Otherwise he will forever stay in the shadows.

    I have done this before and this is not a particularly egregious example but here is a recent decision of the Court of Session refusing an appeal by an asylum seeker from Iran: https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2020csoh85.pdf?sfvrsn=0

    In this case the applicant arrived here in March 2014 and his application for asylum was refused in 2015. His appeal was refused the same year. He is still here. 5 years after his appeal was refused he is still here.

    This period is all too typical. The reason that the asylum is broken is that it is not implemented. No doubt in another few years there will be another appeal, once again funded by public funds. What is the point of a system that produces decisions that are not implemented? Why do we waste our time and money like this?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 36,505


    I'm increasingly sceptical of the government's approach and certainly don't think a national lockdown (which incidentally I think will end up being for months with a short break at Xmas) is the right thing at the moment.

    Yet I voted Remain.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 37,468

    The asylum system is broken. It was designed for another age, is full of loopholes and is ripe for abuse - and, indeed, is being abused.

    Absolute numbers this year are only part of it - we had record numbers infiltrating across the channel as well (4 times what they were the previous year) and there's nothing to stop it increasing still further next year. People are worried it'll continue to spiral out of control and the images we've seen on our TV screens this summer provide a very visceral example of our inability to adequately control our borders.

    If centrists want to defeat the populist right then they need to come up with practical solutions that address this - not just put their fingers in their ears and assert ever more loudly that There Is No Problem. They tried that (and changing the subject) with the EU too and look where that got them. It's the voters that decide what's important to them and what needs addressing.

    And it can be done: David Cameron got the closest I've seen for any PM with his thoughtful asylum policy. He abjectly failed with free movement (another example of centrist extremism - yes, ideologues exist there too) but he did - eventually - wake up to the issue.

    Farage will pop up again if Boris doesn't own and grip this issue. Otherwise he will forever stay in the shadows.

    The first step is for government to fund the courts. Implementing hundreds of new laws each year whilst cutting spending on courts by 25% over the last decade inevitably results in poor outcomes. Make the number of laws the govt can introduce proportional to the court spending and we would see better outcomes and fewer, better, clearer laws.
    That's very probably part of it and this conversation is good because it demonstrates an interest in solutions that will have a meaningful impact on the problem.

    Treating the voters with disdain at best and contempt at worst for having the audacity to be concerned about immigration can only have one ultimate outcome.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 7,090

    IanB2 said:

    An entertaining lead!

    To the story we can add the parties we were promised (or threatened with) that never got done. Alan Sked - the very original founder of UKIp who parted company with his baby long ago - was briefly in the news again a few years ago through some new party he was intending to launch. Arron Banks during the Brexit parliamentary saga was apparently going to pour his money into a new party. And Farage at various times has threatened us with new political entities.

    Once you start with a new party it clearly becomes a habit.

    First they ignore you, then laugh at you, then they fight you.. then you win.

    We've gone from "win" (2016) back to ignoring and laughing, which is where we were in the late 90s/ early 00s, but we shouldn't forget what's happened next.

    If you want to keep laughing (or ignoring) the populist right then centrist parties need to address the issues that mobilise voters around them or they'll be doomed to relive the same experiences all over again - or worse. Just shouting more loudly that they're wrong and you don't agree won't do it.

    The reason I keep saying centrists are like the Bourbons is that I don't see much evidence they've learn anything or forgotten anything from the last five years. So I'm not overly hopeful although I pray there is at least some cognitive diversity and intelligence out there.
    It is a populist govt in charge making decisions and has been for the last 4 years. Their job to find the solutions and address the issues at the moment.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 2,053
    IshmaelZ said:

    Nice piece. On one level the populist right just looks like a laughable collection of nut jobs, weirdos and closet racists (and outed racists too of course). On the other hand they effected the most significant political change in Britain in decades - albeit with some help from mainstream right wing politicians - so dismiss them at your peril. They're like a damp patch on your wall - nasty and unsightly, and indicative of a more serious underlying problem that will take time and money to fix. And if you ignore it and hope it just goes away, you will regret it.

    Wouldn't have happened without a treacherous sellout by the left, so stop being partisan about it. The right wing politicians were up front about being shits and were doing the job they were elected to do. Corbyn otoh...
    This analysis is partially true but leaves out the inconvenient truth. Overwhelmingly UK voters are on the centre, centre left and centre right. The extreme right (and extreme left of course) in opposing the EU chanced upon an issue where millions of centrist voters thought the same and had, mistakenly, been denied a serious voice for decades due to the centrist party consensus that the issue must be allowed an extended hibernation until it died sometime this century.

    That is the one of the top four failures of UK party policy since the war.

    For voters Brexit is an issue for centrists. There are not enough extremists to go round for Brexit to have won the referendum. The maths is plain. The establishment is still in denial about this - perhaps because the policy failure is too great to face.

  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 6,407
    DavidL said:


    For the avoidance of doubt, I think the title at least is misleading. There is no pressure from the populist right in the UK.

    The populist right were instrumental in the Brexit win and have toppled 2 prime ministers in the past five years.

    They have the most visited news website in the UK after BBC and Twitter. They are definitely powerful in the UK.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,643
    rcs1000 said:

    Well I for one thoroughly enjoyed the Header.

    Me too.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 37,468

    IanB2 said:

    An entertaining lead!

    To the story we can add the parties we were promised (or threatened with) that never got done. Alan Sked - the very original founder of UKIp who parted company with his baby long ago - was briefly in the news again a few years ago through some new party he was intending to launch. Arron Banks during the Brexit parliamentary saga was apparently going to pour his money into a new party. And Farage at various times has threatened us with new political entities.

    Once you start with a new party it clearly becomes a habit.

    First they ignore you, then laugh at you, then they fight you.. then you win.

    We've gone from "win" (2016) back to ignoring and laughing, which is where we were in the late 90s/ early 00s, but we shouldn't forget what's happened next.

    If you want to keep laughing (or ignoring) the populist right then centrist parties need to address the issues that mobilise voters around them or they'll be doomed to relive the same experiences all over again - or worse. Just shouting more loudly that they're wrong and you don't agree won't do it.

    The reason I keep saying centrists are like the Bourbons is that I don't see much evidence they've learn anything or forgotten anything from the last five years. So I'm not overly hopeful although I pray there is at least some cognitive diversity and intelligence out there.
    It is a populist govt in charge making decisions and has been for the last 4 years. Their job to find the solutions and address the issues at the moment.
    Oh, I quite agree.

    Nevertheless it's because the issue of the EU and full immigration control (on the levers) was addressed that so many left-wing/centrist liberals on here this morning can enjoy laughing at the patheticness of UKIP and their outriders.

    It has precisely nothing at all to do with them. Had we followed their policies those parties would now be on 30%+ of the national vote and the kingmakers in any Government, and demanding even more radical politics than we have at present.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 28,733

    IanB2 said:

    An entertaining lead!

    To the story we can add the parties we were promised (or threatened with) that never got done. Alan Sked - the very original founder of UKIp who parted company with his baby long ago - was briefly in the news again a few years ago through some new party he was intending to launch. Arron Banks during the Brexit parliamentary saga was apparently going to pour his money into a new party. And Farage at various times has threatened us with new political entities.

    Once you start with a new party it clearly becomes a habit.

    First they ignore you, then laugh at you, then they fight you.. then you win.

    We've gone from "win" (2016) back to ignoring and laughing, which is where we were in the late 90s/ early 00s, but we shouldn't forget what's happened next.

    If you want to keep laughing (or ignoring) the populist right then centrist parties need to address the issues that mobilise voters around them or they'll be doomed to relive the same experiences all over again - or worse. Just shouting more loudly that they're wrong and you don't agree won't do it.

    The reason I keep saying centrists are like the Bourbons is that I don't see much evidence they've learn anything or forgotten anything from the last five years. So I'm not overly hopeful although I pray there is at least some cognitive diversity and intelligence out there.
    It is a populist govt in charge making decisions and has been for the last 4 years. Their job to find the solutions and address the issues at the moment.
    Oh, I quite agree.

    Nevertheless it's because the issue of the EU and full immigration control (on the levers) was addressed that so many left-wing/centrist liberals on here this morning can enjoy laughing at the patheticness of UKIP and their outriders.

    It has precisely nothing at all to do with them. Had we followed their policies those parties would now be on 30%+ of the national vote and the kingmakers in any Government, and demanding even more radical politics than we have at present.
    A fair voting system might have been nice.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 33,037
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:


    For the avoidance of doubt, I think the title at least is misleading. There is no pressure from the populist right in the UK.

    The populist right were instrumental in the Brexit win and have toppled 2 prime ministers in the past five years.

    They have the most visited news website in the UK after BBC and Twitter. They are definitely powerful in the UK.
    No, this is a fantasy of those who want to despise the ideas held by many, many others. @algarkirk is exactly right on this and creating straw men amongst shadowy and irrelevant figures is displacement activity at best, delusional at worst.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 2,053
    felix said:

    MrEd said:

    DavidL said:

    I admire Alastair's diligence in tracking these people and even working out who the leaders of UKIP have been but it is wrong to think that this sad bunch of nutters and assorted fruitcakes have any significance, political or otherwise. Or, frankly, that they ever did. Mocking these inadequates is a pretty cheap way of mocking an idea.

    I liked Alastair's article and PB.com has such an interesting range of knowledgeable characters that it is often very illuminating to hear what they have to say. However, I think an article about why people are attracted to these groups (and the populist right) would be more beneficial. The argument of "they are basically racists" is just a lazy one - and also, in the case of the US, weird given many of Trump's supporters in the Rust Belt had voted for Obama previously.
    Of course calling them racist, loony, nutjobs, etc is lazy but it also saves the critics from questioning any of their own beliefs or the issues in question.
    Lazily I don't usually take my own advice, but the word 'populist' is often unhelpful. What is needed in looking at policy and party is: firstly a reasoned non emotive overview of their worldview, and secondly a detailed look at the actual policies currently proposed, especially about the boring bits like budgets, debt, tax, social care, universities, state intervention, international trade.

    Hooray/boo terms like 'populist' don't really inform.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 37,468
    DavidL said:

    The asylum system is broken. It was designed for another age, is full of loopholes and is ripe for abuse - and, indeed, is being abused.

    Absolute numbers this year are only part of it - we had record numbers infiltrating across the channel as well (4 times what they were the previous year) and there's nothing to stop it increasing still further next year. People are worried it'll continue to spiral out of control and the images we've seen on our TV screens this summer provide a very visceral example of our inability to adequately control our borders.

    If centrists want to defeat the populist right then they need to come up with practical solutions that address this - not just put their fingers in their ears and assert ever more loudly that There Is No Problem. They tried that (and changing the subject) with the EU too and look where that got them. It's the voters that decide what's important to them and what needs addressing.

    And it can be done: David Cameron got the closest I've seen for any PM with his thoughtful asylum policy. He abjectly failed with free movement (another example of centrist extremism - yes, ideologues exist there too) but he did - eventually - wake up to the issue.

    Farage will pop up again if Boris doesn't own and grip this issue. Otherwise he will forever stay in the shadows.

    I have done this before and this is not a particularly egregious example but here is a recent decision of the Court of Session refusing an appeal by an asylum seeker from Iran: https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2020csoh85.pdf?sfvrsn=0

    In this case the applicant arrived here in March 2014 and his application for asylum was refused in 2015. His appeal was refused the same year. He is still here. 5 years after his appeal was refused he is still here.

    This period is all too typical. The reason that the asylum is broken is that it is not implemented. No doubt in another few years there will be another appeal, once again funded by public funds. What is the point of a system that produces decisions that are not implemented? Why do we waste our time and money like this?
    Because there is an agency of people in the charity and legal sector who see it as their job to maximise inward immigration and frustrate deportations on any grounds whatsoever. And, to be fair, our existing system of domestic law and international treaties and conventions allows for it.

    The fact that their values marry up with what's in their business interests is entirely coincidential of course.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 11,618
    It takes Alastair's genius to describe just how bonkers is the populist right.

    @Scott_xP, the interesting tweet in that thread is this one:



  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,643

    IanB2 said:

    An entertaining lead!

    To the story we can add the parties we were promised (or threatened with) that never got done. Alan Sked - the very original founder of UKIp who parted company with his baby long ago - was briefly in the news again a few years ago through some new party he was intending to launch. Arron Banks during the Brexit parliamentary saga was apparently going to pour his money into a new party. And Farage at various times has threatened us with new political entities.

    Once you start with a new party it clearly becomes a habit.

    First they ignore you, then laugh at you, then they fight you.. then you win.

    We've gone from "win" (2016) back to ignoring and laughing, which is where we were in the late 90s/ early 00s, but we shouldn't forget what's happened next.

    If you want to keep laughing (or ignoring) the populist right then centrist parties need to address the issues that mobilise voters around them or they'll be doomed to relive the same experiences all over again - or worse. Just shouting more loudly that they're wrong and you don't agree won't do it.

    The reason I keep saying centrists are like the Bourbons is that I don't see much evidence they've learn anything or forgotten anything from the last five years. So I'm not overly hopeful although I pray there is at least some cognitive diversity and intelligence out there.
    There is a lot to criticise in the asylum system which was written in and for another age and needs thoughtful updating, as you say.

    But two points:-

    1.Facts should not be ignored. Asylum claims are down this year. Wishing such facts away does not help anyone.
    2.One country on its own can do relatively little. Britain could, for instance, invest in the system which determines asylum claims some that they are dealt with speedily and efficiently. But there is a resistance to that because that would involve spending money on courts and lawyers or something. The delays will therefore get worse, which is unfair and infuriating to everyone concerned.

    But changing what asylum means / getting agreement with other countries re the return of those who do not qualify / sharing information and intelligence / dealing with people traffickers etc all necessarily involve working with other countries. Just shouting about controlling our borders will not get us very far but that - and attacking those doing their job under existing laws - seem to be the extent of this government’s policy.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 2,053

    DavidL said:

    The asylum system is broken. It was designed for another age, is full of loopholes and is ripe for abuse - and, indeed, is being abused.

    Absolute numbers this year are only part of it - we had record numbers infiltrating across the channel as well (4 times what they were the previous year) and there's nothing to stop it increasing still further next year. People are worried it'll continue to spiral out of control and the images we've seen on our TV screens this summer provide a very visceral example of our inability to adequately control our borders.

    If centrists want to defeat the populist right then they need to come up with practical solutions that address this - not just put their fingers in their ears and assert ever more loudly that There Is No Problem. They tried that (and changing the subject) with the EU too and look where that got them. It's the voters that decide what's important to them and what needs addressing.

    And it can be done: David Cameron got the closest I've seen for any PM with his thoughtful asylum policy. He abjectly failed with free movement (another example of centrist extremism - yes, ideologues exist there too) but he did - eventually - wake up to the issue.

    Farage will pop up again if Boris doesn't own and grip this issue. Otherwise he will forever stay in the shadows.

    I have done this before and this is not a particularly egregious example but here is a recent decision of the Court of Session refusing an appeal by an asylum seeker from Iran: https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2020csoh85.pdf?sfvrsn=0

    In this case the applicant arrived here in March 2014 and his application for asylum was refused in 2015. His appeal was refused the same year. He is still here. 5 years after his appeal was refused he is still here.

    This period is all too typical. The reason that the asylum is broken is that it is not implemented. No doubt in another few years there will be another appeal, once again funded by public funds. What is the point of a system that produces decisions that are not implemented? Why do we waste our time and money like this?
    Because there is an agency of people in the charity and legal sector who see it as their job to maximise inward immigration and frustrate deportations on any grounds whatsoever. And, to be fair, our existing system of domestic law and international treaties and conventions allows for it.

    The fact that their values marry up with what's in their business interests is entirely coincidential of course.
    Don't blame lawyers for getting government to obey its own laws when government controls the only body with the power to make them. Don't blame lawyers for government incompetence. Don't blame lawyers for the scandal which is the Home Office and the Home Secretary.

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 18,643
    DavidL said:

    The asylum system is broken. It was designed for another age, is full of loopholes and is ripe for abuse - and, indeed, is being abused.

    Absolute numbers this year are only part of it - we had record numbers infiltrating across the channel as well (4 times what they were the previous year) and there's nothing to stop it increasing still further next year. People are worried it'll continue to spiral out of control and the images we've seen on our TV screens this summer provide a very visceral example of our inability to adequately control our borders.

    If centrists want to defeat the populist right then they need to come up with practical solutions that address this - not just put their fingers in their ears and assert ever more loudly that There Is No Problem. They tried that (and changing the subject) with the EU too and look where that got them. It's the voters that decide what's important to them and what needs addressing.

    And it can be done: David Cameron got the closest I've seen for any PM with his thoughtful asylum policy. He abjectly failed with free movement (another example of centrist extremism - yes, ideologues exist there too) but he did - eventually - wake up to the issue.

    Farage will pop up again if Boris doesn't own and grip this issue. Otherwise he will forever stay in the shadows.

    I have done this before and this is not a particularly egregious example but here is a recent decision of the Court of Session refusing an appeal by an asylum seeker from Iran: https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2020csoh85.pdf?sfvrsn=0

    In this case the applicant arrived here in March 2014 and his application for asylum was refused in 2015. His appeal was refused the same year. He is still here. 5 years after his appeal was refused he is still here.

    This period is all too typical. The reason that the asylum is broken is that it is not implemented. No doubt in another few years there will be another appeal, once again funded by public funds. What is the point of a system that produces decisions that are not implemented? Why do we waste our time and money like this?
    Why is he still here? That is a failure of the deportation system which is in the hands of the government. This case shows the legal side of it working well - application and final appeal all dealt with in less than 2 years. But the government end failing. And yet the government - rather than do anything about its end - attacks lawyers instead.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 12,796

    Alastair's threads are the epitome of narcissistic waffle.

    Can't you stick to political betting, cut out your own self-importance, and make them a third of the length? Make one point and make it well.

    Mike does this brilliantly.

    I look forward to reading one from you 'Rose.

    Very entertaining Alastair
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 36,196
    edited October 15



    I'm increasingly sceptical of the government's approach and certainly don't think a national lockdown (which incidentally I think will end up being for months with a short break at Xmas) is the right thing at the moment.

    Yet I voted Remain.
    Hodges is right and it is sad to see

    A national lockdown which would have to be at least 4 weeks is not justified until the results of tiering are anaylised

    France has locked down 9 cities with 9.00 - 6.00 curfews and that should be considered next if tier 3 is not working

    There can be no justification for closing areas with low covid rates
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 19,949
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:


    For the avoidance of doubt, I think the title at least is misleading. There is no pressure from the populist right in the UK.

    The populist right were instrumental in the Brexit win and have toppled 2 prime ministers in the past five years.

    They have the most visited news website in the UK after BBC and Twitter. They are definitely powerful in the UK.
    And our PM, if not 'officially' a member of the populist right, is riding their tiger.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 42,466
    DavidL said:

    The asylum system is broken. It was designed for another age, is full of loopholes and is ripe for abuse - and, indeed, is being abused.

    Absolute numbers this year are only part of it - we had record numbers infiltrating across the channel as well (4 times what they were the previous year) and there's nothing to stop it increasing still further next year. People are worried it'll continue to spiral out of control and the images we've seen on our TV screens this summer provide a very visceral example of our inability to adequately control our borders.

    If centrists want to defeat the populist right then they need to come up with practical solutions that address this - not just put their fingers in their ears and assert ever more loudly that There Is No Problem. They tried that (and changing the subject) with the EU too and look where that got them. It's the voters that decide what's important to them and what needs addressing.

    And it can be done: David Cameron got the closest I've seen for any PM with his thoughtful asylum policy. He abjectly failed with free movement (another example of centrist extremism - yes, ideologues exist there too) but he did - eventually - wake up to the issue.

    Farage will pop up again if Boris doesn't own and grip this issue. Otherwise he will forever stay in the shadows.

    I have done this before and this is not a particularly egregious example but here is a recent decision of the Court of Session refusing an appeal by an asylum seeker from Iran: https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/docs/default-source/cos-general-docs/pdf-docs-for-opinions/2020csoh85.pdf?sfvrsn=0

    In this case the applicant arrived here in March 2014 and his application for asylum was refused in 2015. His appeal was refused the same year. He is still here. 5 years after his appeal was refused he is still here.

    This period is all too typical. The reason that the asylum is broken is that it is not implemented. No doubt in another few years there will be another appeal, once again funded by public funds. What is the point of a system that produces decisions that are not implemented? Why do we waste our time and money like this?
    Is it beyond the wit of man that if a court lawfully says asylum is denied that the individual is taking direct from the court to an airport?
Sign In or Register to comment.