The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
We are all on the same roller coaster, just at different points...
Swedish colleagues reporting Stockholm, Gothenburg and other areas recommending the following voluntary actions: - Avoid public indoors locations such as shops, shopping malls, museums, libraries, bath houses and gyms. Visit grocery stores and pharmacies only as necessary. - Avoid public gatherings such as meetings, concerts, shows and sports events. This does not apply to children born 2005 or later. - Avoid physical contact with people outside your household if possible. Avoid participating in parties and other social events.
I very much like the "recommend" bit.
Rather than allow police to enter your premises on suspicion of you holding a birthday party for your granny.
Polisen don't need to enforce it though, the vast majority of Swedes will comply.
I would suggest the bravest man alive would be the civil servant, who some little time ago, decided that because some signatures were missing on paperwork, that all special forces extra allowances would not be paid for that month.
Yes, he decided to cut the pay of the SAS, SBS etc overnight.....
This morning I had never been more ashamed to be a Labour party member. This afternoon, I feel proud that we have a leadership prepared to make politically difficult, but morally unavoidable, decisions. There will now be open warfare. Some unions may walk, some MPs too, many members will. Good. This is a conflict that Starmer, Evans and co must win. If they do, Labour will become a fully electable alternative party of government once more. If not, the party is over, done and finished. No pressure, then, Sir Keir.
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
Are you surprised that the Lib Dems are sinking into oblivion? Really those that held their nose and voted Tory should be going over to the yellows, at least in the mid-term polling that we have now.
France paying the price for sticking up for Western values.
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
According to my reading of the proposal, showing a copy of the Charlie H at a hypothetical dinner party would be prosecutable.
Apparently it introduces "an offence of stirring-up of hatred against people with protected characteristics", so it's not even a bill that will help protect everyone, just the chosen few.
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
Get a grip.
"Protected characteristics These are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation."
I don't know what you've been reading, but everyone has protected characteristics. You can't stir up hatred against the majority/less commonly persecuted in any of those groups either. So it's not ok to stir up hatred against men, against heterosexual people, against non-disabled people, against non-pregnant people, against atheists (or Christians) etc etc. The point about equality legislation is that it does protect everyone, not just those traditionally persecuted. There's a clue in the name.
(I haven't looked in to the proposed Scottish law to see whether it makes sense, so won't comment on that, just on the random raging against equality/anti-hate law)
Separately, @Malmesbury (genuinely interested) why would showing a copy of Charlie H stir up hatred? It's offensive to Muslims, sure, but does it stir up hatred? May be I've missed something either in Charlie H (I've only briefly read reports of what's in it) or the law, but I can't see it myself.
If the law was applied equally to all groups then yes you'd have a point, but it is quite clear that they aren't.
For example the professor at Cambridge that tweeted that "white lives don't matter" and "every day I resist the urge to kneecap white men" had no action taken against her.
If the target of the tweets had been a protected minority then she would have been investigated by the police, no doubt about it.
As for the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, it's clear they've "stirred up hatred" since a result of them getting published they got machine gunned to death and now people are getting beheaded in France left, right and centre over them.
Thank you for the measured reply, particularly as I was a bit rude to you (sorry for that).
I agree the law should be applied to all and it is important that it is. I'm not aware of those tweets, but I don't think tweeting "white lives don't matter" is stirring up hatred. It's stupid and crass, yes, but I don't think it is/should be illegal. The same applies to tweeting "black lives don't matter". For the second, "every day I resist the urge to kneecap white men", I'd probably need a bit more context to judge whether it's actually stirring up hatred or stupid hyperbole such as "X person should be shot", but would have thought that might interest the police to have a word at least (same if it was "every day I resist the urge to kneecap black men"). I wouldn't employ that person.
No problem, it wasn't so rude.
To be honest it's not just the law itself that is not applied equality, but institutions as well.
She got a promotion from Cambridge a few days after those tweets, if it had been a white professor saying the same things about black people then I think we all know they would have been fired immediately.
In contrast the guy who flew the "white lives matter" banner in Burnley lost his job as an engineer, as did his girlfriend. His mother was threatened with the sack as well, she only managed to keep her job after disowning him in public.
I'm afraid I have no confidence whatsoever that these hate laws will be applied equally. Even if they were, criminalising people for saying stupid stuff privately in their own house is completely crazy.
Anyone who decides to fly a "white lives matter" banner is a tw*t. I have no sympathy.
"white lives matter" = horrible twat and deserves everything he gets "black lives matter" = good and noble cause
But at the same time the hate laws will totally be applied equally.
You make a very good point. Maybe we should start a campaign for able bodied people as well because of the advantages cripples have over us like wheel chair ramps etc, etc.
You are comparing black people to cripples?
What? No I am pointing out how ridiculous your post is with an analogy.
You don't need to campaign for those with power. You campaign for those that are discriminated against unjustly.
White lives do matter, but there is no need whatsoever to say so. If one does say so it says a great deal about the person who says it.
What are you wibbling on about?
Studies have shown that white working class boys are the worst performing group of all. Maybe it is time you educated yourself.
Yeah just ignore the point and go off on a tangent. Yes white working class boys struggle in education and that has nothing whatsoever to do with the point you raised
Any idiot flying a white lives matter banner is doing it in response to the black lives matter banners who are campaigning for fair treatment and anti discrimination of black people.
I just wonder what the views are on race of anyone holding a white lives matter banner. I sort I think I can guess.
Well it all boils down to whether you think black people are massively discriminated against or not here in the UK. I personally don't and have seen little credible evidence for it.
But others do and see them as perpetual victims that need special treatment.
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
True, true.
In fairness, both were Brexit elections and not really so much about party loyalty. Still I think there are lots of voters in inner London who want to vote for Corbyn's politics, maybe he and his cronies should take the new management on
Bullshit, antisemitism is on the extremes of the left and right.
Or did you miss Trump's supporters chanting 'Jews will not replace us' or the background of alleged perpetrator of the Tree of Life synagogue shooting?
Yawn. I didn’t even mention the right. Straw man.
However I do believe anti-Semitic discourse is now readily accepted on the mainstream Left in a way it isn’t on the right (tho it was, once). Look at these people attending a Corbyn rally. They clearly think it’s OK to say this stuff into a camera.
When I pointed that out while everyone on here was rushing to support BLM over the summer I was reliably informed by PB luminaries that my concerns were made up.
A lot of people are quite naive about what is happening.
Years ago I went to the doctor with anxiety, and she recommended I stop watching the news as it catastrophizes everything! These stats are doing the same, and I guess are another reason why mental health is a big problem during lockdown.
Bullshit, antisemitism is on the extremes of the left and right.
Or did you miss Trump's supporters chanting 'Jews will not replace us' or the background of alleged perpetrator of the Tree of Life synagogue shooting?
Yawn. I didn’t even mention the right. Straw man.
However I do believe anti-Semitic discourse is now readily accepted on the mainstream Left in a way it isn’t on the right (tho it was, once). Look at these people attending a Corbyn rally. They clearly think it’s OK to say this stuff into a camera.
There was a very good interview with Bari Weiss on Sam Harris podcast on the range of antisemitism...the right (Great replacement stuff), the left (the rich Jews control the world), the Islamists (the Jews must be removed from existence).
When I pointed that out while everyone on here was rushing to support BLM over the summer I was reliably informed by PB luminaries that my concerns were made up.
A lot of people are quite naive about what is happening.
We are all on the same roller coaster, just at different points...
Swedish colleagues reporting Stockholm, Gothenburg and other areas recommending the following voluntary actions: - Avoid public indoors locations such as shops, shopping malls, museums, libraries, bath houses and gyms. Visit grocery stores and pharmacies only as necessary. - Avoid public gatherings such as meetings, concerts, shows and sports events. This does not apply to children born 2005 or later. - Avoid physical contact with people outside your household if possible. Avoid participating in parties and other social events.
I very much like the "recommend" bit.
Rather than allow police to enter your premises on suspicion of you holding a birthday party for your granny.
Polisen don't need to enforce it though, the vast majority of Swedes will comply.
Well that could be because they're trusted.
That's an interesting point. I don't know what the Swedes think of their police, although I've got to say they (the officers I've seen patrolling in Stockholm) don't look like they would be trifled with at all. I think the Swedes trust their government and public authorities in general more than most countries.
Someone posted the state EV voting figures for Texas earlier, i think Harris was slightly under the overall % vs 2016, though not by much, but the more it exceeds 2016 the better for Biden for sure. Still a few days to go of course as well
This surprises me, I must admit. There is the benefit of showing that "Under New Leadership" is no empty slogan. Against this is the risk of internal warfare in the party. I would have said the potential damage is greater than the benefit but it looks like Starmer disagrees. Let's see how the Left react.
He’s a f*cking anti-Semite and you would have ZERO tolerance for a clear and obvious racist in the Tory party. Your true colours are showing.
My "true colours". Oh dear. C'mon.
Despite writing countless posts on here that are not - cough - completely free of racist sentiment I have noticed that you tend to become apoplectic about antisemitism on the Left and in the Labour Party.
Why is this? I bet you can't explain it to my satisfaction.
Interestingly there is a poll of American Jews which goes 75-22 for Biden. One of findings is that they're less impressed by Trumps moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem and being the 'most pro Israeli President in US history' than they are by his support for white supremicists at home. This is something little understood by the many Faragist/Johnsonites shouting anti-semite at Corbyn who post here.
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
Are you surprised that the Lib Dems are sinking into oblivion? Really those that held their nose and voted Tory should be going over to the yellows, at least in the mid-term polling that we have now.
Yes and No.
The Lib Dems have been poorly led for a while.
When the history books are written one of the great political failures of the last 100 years will be the Lib Dems going all Pro Remain and only managing hoover up 11% of the electorate.
Well the silence from both sides has been deafening for the past few days. Which is usually a good sign.
I suspect it will end with a win for the EU on LPF but tucked away in small print and a win for the UK on fish presented in such a way as Boris can claim total victory.
I gather from the implicit logic of several PB Tories that if Corbo had made antisemitic remarks at home, perhaps at one of those Covid busting dinner parties, that would have been ok. Have I got this right?
The investigation itself isn't about "people saying racist things," it's about how complaints about those things were dealt with internally. They were dealt with very badly - one of the things investigated was the way Corbyn's top team were re-editing complaints to be submitted for internal investigation. Whether they're racist or not, it is abominably stupid. Corbyn takes that stupidity to an all-new level.
Why do marxists have blind spots on the way they wield their own power? The entire theory is about power structures.
It's the Leninist vanguard theory which puts those in the vanguard on an exalted moral plane.
All groups are guilty of it to an extent, but you'd think that people committed to historical materialism would be more able to recognise it when it happens.
This surprises me, I must admit. There is the benefit of showing that "Under New Leadership" is no empty slogan. Against this is the risk of internal warfare in the party. I would have said the potential damage is greater than the benefit but it looks like Starmer disagrees. Let's see how the Left react.
He’s a f*cking anti-Semite and you would have ZERO tolerance for a clear and obvious racist in the Tory party. Your true colours are showing.
My "true colours". Oh dear. C'mon.
Despite writing countless posts on here that are not - cough - completely free of racist sentiment I have noticed that you tend to become apoplectic about antisemitism on the Left and in the Labour Party.
Why is this? I bet you can't explain it to my satisfaction.
Interestingly there is a poll of American Jews which goes 75-22 for Biden. One of findings is that they're less impressed by Trumps moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem and being the 'most pro Israeli President in US history' than they are by his support for white supremicists at home. This is something little understood by the many Faragist/Johnsonites shouting anti-semite at Corbyn who post here.
We are all on the same roller coaster, just at different points...
Except they kept their schools open all the way through. So their rollercoaster has been a lot smoother
So, the latest IMF forecasts suggests the UK economy will shrink by 10.4% this year and recover 5.7% in 2021.
Data today showed the US economy is now 3.5% smaller than before COVID after a greater than expected 33.1% rebound in the last quarter.
4Q growth is probably slowing, but its not beyond the bounds of possibility the US could end 2020 GBP flat or positive.
Europe? More stimulus ahead as lockdown threatens double dip recession
4Q growth in the US will be negative (as it will in Europe).
Also, it' not 3.5% smaller than before Covid because you can't "add" percentage changes. If your economy contracts 50% and then grows 50% it will be 25% smaller than at the start.
In this case (and this is slightly simplifying) but if you start at 100 at the end of December * 0.95 for Q1, then 0.69 for Q2 and then 1.33 then you get to - not 95 - but to 87. (The numbers are not exactly this because the US reports annualised growth rather than actual quarterly changes, and I can't be arsed to work it out, but the point is the same.)
Take it up with Bloomberg who claim the economy is 3.50% below its pre-pandemic peak. Ho hum
Improvement in the Test and Trace tracking this week.
The virus does seem to be turning a corner in this country.
Someone, I do know who but won't embarrass them, said on here two weeks ago that it was all levelling off. That was when cases were around 10k a day and deaths below 100.
Every time anyone claims lordship over this virus they get bitten in the ass.
I suspect we're in for a rough winter.
It does seem to be levelling off, the increase in rate of cases seems to be slowing down each week for the past fortnight.
But of course deaths are a lagging indicator. Deaths yesterday are for infections 2-3 weeks ago. Deaths 2 weeks ago were for infections more than a month ago. Even if we had hit the peak today in infections we would still see cases rise (as we get better at tracking them) and deaths rise (due to lag).
More correctly, the exponential increase appeared to shift to a slower, more linear increase.
I think you two are seeing what you want to see.
I see levelling off in Northern Ireland certainly. Otherwise looks a pretty steady growth of around 20%/week in England to me.
Bullshit, antisemitism is on the extremes of the left and right.
Or did you miss Trump's supporters chanting 'Jews will not replace us' or the background of alleged perpetrator of the Tree of Life synagogue shooting?
Yawn. I didn’t even mention the right. Straw man.
However I do believe anti-Semitic discourse is now readily accepted on the mainstream Left in a way it isn’t on the right (tho it was, once). Look at these people attending a Corbyn rally. They clearly think it’s OK to say this stuff into a camera.
There was a very good interview with Bari Weiss on Sam Harris podcast on the range of antisemitism...the right (Great replacement stuff), the left (the rich Jews control the world), the Islamists (the Jews must be removed from existence).
I’ve no doubt there is anti-semitism on the right. Still. The difference is that the right, at least, belatedly perceives it as shameful and ugly, so it is all furtive. Whispers. Little asides that make you wonder
Two generations of anti-Israeli discourse on the left (much of it justified, re the Israeli government) has now morphed into open contempt, dislike, hatred of Jews, and because the Left sees itself as morally beyond reproach, they feel free to express it openly, as so many in their social/political circles agree entirely. Then they are genuinely shocked when others are horrified.
That’s the problem. That’s the hole Corbyn has fallen into. It is sad.
I actually kind of did expect this. The one person who could keep this issue boiling along - for good and ill for the Labour party - given everything else in the news, was Jeremy Corbyn.
His famously mild manner notwithstanding, he really is a terribly vain old man. He cannot countenance being wrong, even in a limited way, he just has to add that little extra to exculpate himself, and undermining any other words he might utilise.
Bravely gets an army of flunkies to do his dirty work and go to jail for him. Bravely gives people nasty nicknames on Twitter. Bravely sucks up to fascist dictators. Bravely pretends he needs to go to hospital with Covid when he doesn't. Bravely allows supporters to get hypothermia waiting hours for him to speak. Bravely encourages people to spread coronavirus. Bravely condones white supremacist violence from a safe distance. Bravely mocks the fallen of two world wars. Bravely assaults women then pays them off.
Bullshit, antisemitism is on the extremes of the left and right.
Or did you miss Trump's supporters chanting 'Jews will not replace us' or the background of alleged perpetrator of the Tree of Life synagogue shooting?
Yawn. I didn’t even mention the right. Straw man.
However I do believe anti-Semitic discourse is now readily accepted on the mainstream Left in a way it isn’t on the right (tho it was, once). Look at these people attending a Corbyn rally. They clearly think it’s OK to say this stuff into a camera.
There was a very good interview with Bari Weiss on Sam Harris podcast on the range of antisemitism...the right (Great replacement stuff), the left (the rich Jews control the world), the Islamists (the Jews must be removed from existence).
I think the issue on the left is via Palestine.
In the Arab world in general, Israel is very often referred to as "The Jews". What would be regarded in the UK as anti-semitic statements are common places. The dictatorial states have used the Jewish bogeyman as the reason/excuse etc for their failings and repressions. So it is very common for people from those societies - having been steeped in this for generations - to express such views.
When you mix this with the modern belief that you can't punch down - telling off minority groups is a no no - then you have an environment where such language is bouncing around unchallenged.
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
Are you surprised that the Lib Dems are sinking into oblivion? Really those that held their nose and voted Tory should be going over to the yellows, at least in the mid-term polling that we have now.
LDs do well when Labour are electable and badly otherwise. Centrist Tories and old fashioned liberals are reluctant to vote for them if it could lead to a Corbyn/Foot type government. That fear will have reduced today. The LDs need to have a better platform though and move away from Brexit.
PB HISTORIANS: has any other major party in Britain suspended its immediately previous leader? I can’t think of an example. Any abroad in other democracies?
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
True, true.
In fairness, both were Brexit elections and not really so much about party loyalty. Still I think there are lots of voters in inner London who want to vote for Corbyn's politics, maybe he and his cronies should take the new management on
The problem with Corbyn is if you just look at raw vote shares it doesn't tell the whole story. A lot of Corbyn's new votes came in already safe Labour seats. For example, Blair got a mere 70% share in Liverpool Riverside in 97, while Corbyn got 85% in 2017.
Let's suppose that Corbyn and friends set up their own party of the left. What vote share would that get them? - maybe 5-10%. How many seats would they win? - maybe 1-2 if some defectors had a high personal vote.
Bullshit, antisemitism is on the extremes of the left and right.
Or did you miss Trump's supporters chanting 'Jews will not replace us' or the background of alleged perpetrator of the Tree of Life synagogue shooting?
Yawn. I didn’t even mention the right. Straw man.
However I do believe anti-Semitic discourse is now readily accepted on the mainstream Left in a way it isn’t on the right (tho it was, once). Look at these people attending a Corbyn rally. They clearly think it’s OK to say this stuff into a camera.
There was a very good interview with Bari Weiss on Sam Harris podcast on the range of antisemitism...the right (Great replacement stuff), the left (the rich Jews control the world), the Islamists (the Jews must be removed from existence).
I think the issue on the left is via Palestine.
In the Arab world in general, Israel is very often referred to as "The Jews". What would be regarded in the UK as anti-semitic statements are common places. The dictatorial states have used the Jewish bogeyman as the reason/excuse etc for their failings and repressions. So it is very common for people from those societies - having been steeped in this for generations - to express such views.
When you mix this with the modern belief that you can't punch down - telling off minority groups is a no no - then you have an environment where such language is bouncing around unchallenged.
Weiss argues it is wider than than just Israel vs Palestine, although obvious that is a big part of it. There is a wider thing about wealth and power and pushing this narrative that the Jews are rich, they control things, they are the establishment, thus they are entrenched against the left wing ideals of fairness and keeping the poor down (even though traditionally Jews in the UK lean left).
France paying the price for sticking up for Western values.
Meanwhile in Scotland we have new hate laws that would make criticising the ideology that carried out this attack in their own homes illegal.
According to my reading of the proposal, showing a copy of the Charlie H at a hypothetical dinner party would be prosecutable.
Apparently it introduces "an offence of stirring-up of hatred against people with protected characteristics", so it's not even a bill that will help protect everyone, just the chosen few.
Essentially an Islamic blasphemy law, one of the key parts of Sharia law being implemented by one of the few Muslims in power in Scotland.
Get a grip.
"Protected characteristics These are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation."
I don't know what you've been reading, but everyone has protected characteristics. You can't stir up hatred against the majority/less commonly persecuted in any of those groups either. So it's not ok to stir up hatred against men, against heterosexual people, against non-disabled people, against non-pregnant people, against atheists (or Christians) etc etc. The point about equality legislation is that it does protect everyone, not just those traditionally persecuted. There's a clue in the name.
(I haven't looked in to the proposed Scottish law to see whether it makes sense, so won't comment on that, just on the random raging against equality/anti-hate law)
Separately, @Malmesbury (genuinely interested) why would showing a copy of Charlie H stir up hatred? It's offensive to Muslims, sure, but does it stir up hatred? May be I've missed something either in Charlie H (I've only briefly read reports of what's in it) or the law, but I can't see it myself.
If the law was applied equally to all groups then yes you'd have a point, but it is quite clear that they aren't.
For example the professor at Cambridge that tweeted that "white lives don't matter" and "every day I resist the urge to kneecap white men" had no action taken against her.
If the target of the tweets had been a protected minority then she would have been investigated by the police, no doubt about it.
As for the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, it's clear they've "stirred up hatred" since a result of them getting published they got machine gunned to death and now people are getting beheaded in France left, right and centre over them.
Thank you for the measured reply, particularly as I was a bit rude to you (sorry for that).
I agree the law should be applied to all and it is important that it is. I'm not aware of those tweets, but I don't think tweeting "white lives don't matter" is stirring up hatred. It's stupid and crass, yes, but I don't think it is/should be illegal. The same applies to tweeting "black lives don't matter". For the second, "every day I resist the urge to kneecap white men", I'd probably need a bit more context to judge whether it's actually stirring up hatred or stupid hyperbole such as "X person should be shot", but would have thought that might interest the police to have a word at least (same if it was "every day I resist the urge to kneecap black men"). I wouldn't employ that person.
No problem, it wasn't so rude.
To be honest it's not just the law itself that is not applied equality, but institutions as well.
She got a promotion from Cambridge a few days after those tweets, if it had been a white professor saying the same things about black people then I think we all know they would have been fired immediately.
In contrast the guy who flew the "white lives matter" banner in Burnley lost his job as an engineer, as did his girlfriend. His mother was threatened with the sack as well, she only managed to keep her job after disowning him in public.
I'm afraid I have no confidence whatsoever that these hate laws will be applied equally. Even if they were, criminalising people for saying stupid stuff privately in their own house is completely crazy.
Anyone who decides to fly a "white lives matter" banner is a tw*t. I have no sympathy.
"white lives matter" = horrible twat and deserves everything he gets "black lives matter" = good and noble cause
But at the same time the hate laws will totally be applied equally.
You make a very good point. Maybe we should start a campaign for able bodied people as well because of the advantages cripples have over us like wheel chair ramps etc, etc.
You are comparing black people to cripples?
What? No I am pointing out how ridiculous your post is with an analogy.
You don't need to campaign for those with power. You campaign for those that are discriminated against unjustly.
White lives do matter, but there is no need whatsoever to say so. If one does say so it says a great deal about the person who says it.
What are you wibbling on about?
Studies have shown that white working class boys are the worst performing group of all. Maybe it is time you educated yourself.
Yeah just ignore the point and go off on a tangent. Yes white working class boys struggle in education and that has nothing whatsoever to do with the point you raised
Any idiot flying a white lives matter banner is doing it in response to the black lives matter banners who are campaigning for fair treatment and anti discrimination of black people.
I just wonder what the views are on race of anyone holding a white lives matter banner. I sort I think I can guess.
Well it all boils down to whether you think black people are massively discriminated against or not here in the UK. I personally don't and have seen little credible evidence for it.
But others do and see them as perpetual victims that need special treatment.
Well we are not America I grant you and it depends how you define massively, but we clearly still have issues. I can't tell you the number of times a friend of mine as been told to go back home from where he comes from (which is the UK by the way).
Anyway again this gets away from the point you made and which I responded to (this is like a discussion with HYUFD re the tangents one goes off on) which is comparing 'white lives matter' to 'black lives matter'.
One is a campaign slogan, the other is crass shouted by someone who is almost certainly a bigot.
PB HISTORIANS: has any other major party in Britain suspended its immediately previous leader? I can’t think of an example. Any abroad in other democracies?
UKIP?
A thread on their leadership woes would be worth a good laugh, even though they are not major anymore.
PB HISTORIANS: has any other major party in Britain suspended its immediately previous leader? I can’t think of an example. Any abroad in other democracies?
UKIP?
A thread on their leadership woes would be worth a good laugh, even though they are not major anymore.
I was once quoted on Oddschecker in the "Next UKIP leader" market
Bullshit, antisemitism is on the extremes of the left and right.
Or did you miss Trump's supporters chanting 'Jews will not replace us' or the background of alleged perpetrator of the Tree of Life synagogue shooting?
Yawn. I didn’t even mention the right. Straw man.
However I do believe anti-Semitic discourse is now readily accepted on the mainstream Left in a way it isn’t on the right (tho it was, once). Look at these people attending a Corbyn rally. They clearly think it’s OK to say this stuff into a camera.
There was a very good interview with Bari Weiss on Sam Harris podcast on the range of antisemitism...the right (Great replacement stuff), the left (the rich Jews control the world), the Islamists (the Jews must be removed from existence).
I think the issue on the left is via Palestine.
In the Arab world in general, Israel is very often referred to as "The Jews". What would be regarded in the UK as anti-semitic statements are common places. The dictatorial states have used the Jewish bogeyman as the reason/excuse etc for their failings and repressions. So it is very common for people from those societies - having been steeped in this for generations - to express such views.
When you mix this with the modern belief that you can't punch down - telling off minority groups is a no no - then you have an environment where such language is bouncing around unchallenged.
Weiss argues it is wider than than just Israel vs Palestine, although obvious that is a big part of it. There is a wider thing about wealth and power and pushing this narrative that the Jews are rich, they control things, they are the establishment, thus they are entrenched against the left wing ideals of fairness and keeping the poor down (even though traditionally Jews in the UK lean left).
I think it is the route in to the left wing. The narrative you describe is exactly the one that has been pushed by government in the Arab world for decades - The Jews control the West and so it is understandable that they always win. And also why the Beloved Leadership needs to be so tough - there is a war to win....
Someone posted the state EV voting figures for Texas earlier, i think Harris was slightly under the overall % vs 2016, though not by much, but the more it exceeds 2016 the better for Biden for sure. Still a few days to go of course as well
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
Are you surprised that the Lib Dems are sinking into oblivion? Really those that held their nose and voted Tory should be going over to the yellows, at least in the mid-term polling that we have now.
LDs do well when Labour are electable and badly otherwise. Centrist Tories and old fashioned liberals are reluctant to vote for them if it could lead to a Corbyn/Foot type government. That fear will have reduced today. The LDs need to have a better platform though and move away from Brexit.
If they had stood up at the last election and said - 2nd referendum, will respect the result - then I think they would have done much better.
Quite so. I don't doubt that some of the angry protests we see around the world are genuine in their feeling, and I accept that for people of strong faith it may well hurt to see mocking or insulting depictions of their religous figures and symbols. But it always just makes me think how weak and insecure they must think their religion is, that some spotty bloke drawing a cartoon must be killed or intimidated for their doodling.
Far from a demonstartion of how strong and important their faith is, it makes it seem like they are saying their faith can be defeated by a cartoon.
Bullshit, antisemitism is on the extremes of the left and right.
Or did you miss Trump's supporters chanting 'Jews will not replace us' or the background of alleged perpetrator of the Tree of Life synagogue shooting?
Yawn. I didn’t even mention the right. Straw man.
However I do believe anti-Semitic discourse is now readily accepted on the mainstream Left in a way it isn’t on the right (tho it was, once). Look at these people attending a Corbyn rally. They clearly think it’s OK to say this stuff into a camera.
There was a very good interview with Bari Weiss on Sam Harris podcast on the range of antisemitism...the right (Great replacement stuff), the left (the rich Jews control the world), the Islamists (the Jews must be removed from existence).
I think the issue on the left is via Palestine.
In the Arab world in general, Israel is very often referred to as "The Jews". What would be regarded in the UK as anti-semitic statements are common places. The dictatorial states have used the Jewish bogeyman as the reason/excuse etc for their failings and repressions. So it is very common for people from those societies - having been steeped in this for generations - to express such views.
When you mix this with the modern belief that you can't punch down - telling off minority groups is a no no - then you have an environment where such language is bouncing around unchallenged.
Weiss argues it is wider than than just Israel vs Palestine, although obvious that is a big part of it. There is a wider thing about wealth and power and pushing this narrative that the Jews are rich, they control things, they are the establishment, thus they are entrenched against the left wing ideals of fairness and keeping the poor down (even though traditionally Jews in the UK lean left).
I think it is the route in to the left wing. The narrative you describe is exactly the one that has been pushed by government in the Arab world for decades - The Jews control the West and so it is understandable that they always win. And also why the Beloved Leadership needs to be so tough - there is a war to win....
One thing that changed, and why we saw the rise of Corbyn and Sanders (and now Biden standing on a much more left wing platform), after 2008 crash lots of impressionable people decided that the system was rigged against them , want a different answer and for some that has led them down a particular path that has included casual use of Jewish tropes for who is responsible for the current system.
On the right, the great replacement theory stuff has bubbled away for decades, but obviously Trump has managed to embolden a lot of groups to be much more open about this crazy conspiracy theory.
If we thought the reaction to 2008 crash could have been unstabling, the path out of COVID is far more dangerous.
I love having the French as our friendly enemy across the water, but I hope they get huge amounts of support in their ongoing fight on the issues that they are facing.
The guy you're retweeting here looks to be a rabid Trumper conspiracy theorist. You probably didn't realize that.
Unfollow perhaps?
lol. You always do this with tweets that make you deeply uncomfortable. Who gives a fuck what the tweeter believes. He could be a flat Earther for all I care. The footage is the footage.
Well the silence from both sides has been deafening for the past few days. Which is usually a good sign.
I suspect it will end with a win for the EU on LPF but tucked away in small print and a win for the UK on fish presented in such a way as Boris can claim total victory.
Spot on. And that's OK if that what it takes to avoid a No Deal crash out.
Someone posted the state EV voting figures for Texas earlier, i think Harris was slightly under the overall % vs 2016, though not by much, but the more it exceeds 2016 the better for Biden for sure. Still a few days to go of course as well
I love having the French as our friendly enemy across the water, but I hope they get huge amounts of support in their ongoing fight on the issues that they are facing.
Macron has been spot on about this issue and things like the statue topplers colonialism......but he is also incredibly unpopular within France.
PB HISTORIANS: has any other major party in Britain suspended its immediately previous leader? I can’t think of an example. Any abroad in other democracies?
UKIP?
A thread on their leadership woes would be worth a good laugh, even though they are not major anymore.
I was once quoted on Oddschecker in the "Next UKIP leader" market
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
Are you surprised that the Lib Dems are sinking into oblivion? Really those that held their nose and voted Tory should be going over to the yellows, at least in the mid-term polling that we have now.
LDs do well when Labour are electable and badly otherwise. Centrist Tories and old fashioned liberals are reluctant to vote for them if it could lead to a Corbyn/Foot type government. That fear will have reduced today. The LDs need to have a better platform though and move away from Brexit.
If they had stood up at the last election and said - 2nd referendum, will respect the result - then I think they would have done much better.
I think "noneoftheabove" is correct on this. LDs will do well provided the Labour Party are not a big threat to middle England.
PB HISTORIANS: has any other major party in Britain suspended its immediately previous leader? I can’t think of an example. Any abroad in other democracies?
UKIP?
A thread on their leadership woes would be worth a good laugh, even though they are not major anymore.
I was once quoted on Oddschecker in the "Next UKIP leader" market
PB HISTORIANS: has any other major party in Britain suspended its immediately previous leader? I can’t think of an example. Any abroad in other democracies?
UKIP?
A thread on their leadership woes would be worth a good laugh, even though they are not major anymore.
I was once quoted on Oddschecker in the "Next UKIP leader" market
You were in the running ?
No, it was Shadsy mucking about. I was in the running as a candidate in 2015 vs Emily Thornberry in Islington South
Quite so. I don't doubt that some of the angry protests we see around the world are genuine in their feeling, and I accept that for people of strong faith it may well hurt to see mocking or insulting depictions of their religous figures and symbols. But it always just makes me think how weak and insecure they must think their religion is, that some spotty bloke drawing a cartoon must be killed or intimidated for their doodling.
Far from a demonstartion of how strong and important their faith is, it makes it seem like they are saying their faith can be defeated by a cartoon.
That is to misunderstand the worldview. I mentioned before - read the story of the human beings who created the Reformation. Charming, literate, well educated men (and women). Who believed so fundamentally in their truth that being burned at the stake was simply a test. Or burning people at the stake for that matter. They believed utterly, totally, and without doubt. Religion *was* their lives.
In such a context, an insult to their religion is as if you battered their small children. An attack on their very core, on their life itself.
PB HISTORIANS: has any other major party in Britain suspended its immediately previous leader? I can’t think of an example. Any abroad in other democracies?
UKIP?
Anything can happen, this is 2020 ffs. I think there is a high likelihood that we might soon see an ex President of the United States on trial for fraud/felony/blackmail/collusion with foreign powers (take your pick!)
Improvement in the Test and Trace tracking this week.
The virus does seem to be turning a corner in this country.
Someone, I do know who but won't embarrass them, said on here two weeks ago that it was all levelling off. That was when cases were around 10k a day and deaths below 100.
Every time anyone claims lordship over this virus they get bitten in the ass.
I suspect we're in for a rough winter.
It does seem to be levelling off, the increase in rate of cases seems to be slowing down each week for the past fortnight.
But of course deaths are a lagging indicator. Deaths yesterday are for infections 2-3 weeks ago. Deaths 2 weeks ago were for infections more than a month ago. Even if we had hit the peak today in infections we would still see cases rise (as we get better at tracking them) and deaths rise (due to lag).
More correctly, the exponential increase appeared to shift to a slower, more linear increase.
I think you two are seeing what you want to see.
I see levelling off in Northern Ireland certainly. Otherwise looks a pretty steady growth of around 20%/week in England to me.
Northern Ireland, with its puritanical underbelly, loves a restriction, it became a competition between people & communities in the spring to virtue signal who loved the NHS more....some bloke making large vinyl banners was earning a fortune.
We also got away with the first wave of it pretty lightly. At the moment, however, the Derry area apparently has a rate of infection that left Liverpool looking like an also ran.
Perhaps humour doesn't travel well between countries, but I've always found Charlie Hebdo about as unfunny as Steve Bell.
But, I'd accept that even Steve Bell is entitled to draw his unfunny cartoons.
I didn't think that Steve Bell is/was trying to be funny. His cartoons are vituperative attacks on his political opponents - which is a long, long tradition in the Western press.
PB HISTORIANS: has any other major party in Britain suspended its immediately previous leader? I can’t think of an example. Any abroad in other democracies?
There are a few, but it depends on what you mean by ‘suspended.’ For example, Theodore Roosevelt, denied a further run at the Republican nomination in 1912, ran as the leader of a new party, the Progressives. I’m not sure whether you would count that. Many dictators, on toppling their predecessors from the same party, have had them executed, included by hanging, but I don’t think that’s quite what you were referring to.
Apart from Ramsay MAC, mentioned upthread, the only other former British party leader of a party in Parliament who was suspended by his successor (and predecessor) was the Marquis of Hartington, leader of the Liberals from 1875-80. In 1886 he voted against Gladstone’s Home Rule Bill, and as a result was driven from the cabinet and joined the opposition. Whether you would count that as a formal ‘suspension’ I don’t know, but it should be noted that most of his more prominent supporters were not sacked. Party structures were more fluid and the leader had much less formal influence over who was or wasn’t a member of the party.
Gladstone was then defeated and instead of resigning, as he should have done, called an election, which split the party between him and Hartington. In the next 134 years, they have won one election in their own strength.
If you do count that, you might also consider the example of Peel in 1846, who was driven out of the Protectionists by Bentinck’s hatred of him, and whose followers eventually helped found the Liberal party in 1859. Or Lloyd George, who in 1931 was removed as Liberal leader and sat as part of an independent caucus of four for refusing to support the National Government (he rejoined the Liberals In 1935).
But I think we would need to nail down what you mean by a ‘leader’ and also what you mean by ‘suspended.’
Quite so. I don't doubt that some of the angry protests we see around the world are genuine in their feeling, and I accept that for people of strong faith it may well hurt to see mocking or insulting depictions of their religous figures and symbols. But it always just makes me think how weak and insecure they must think their religion is, that some spotty bloke drawing a cartoon must be killed or intimidated for their doodling.
Far from a demonstartion of how strong and important their faith is, it makes it seem like they are saying their faith can be defeated by a cartoon.
That is to misunderstand the worldview. I mentioned before - read the story of the human beings who created the Reformation. Charming, literate, well educated men (and women). Who believed so fundamentally in their truth that being burned at the stake was simply a test. Or burning people at the stake for that matter. They believed utterly, totally, and without doubt. Religion *was* their lives.
In such a context, an insult to their religion is as if you battered their small children. An attack on their very core, on their life itself.
No, I get that it is incredibly central to a great many people. But however they feel, that they have it so centrally to their identities that a puerile insult causes some to be murderous and thousands to attend stupid demonstrations calling on boycotts and intimidation and probably supportive of murderous behaviour (or at least excusing it with weaksauce 'Wrong, but the insult was also wrong' crap), demonstrate that the centrality is based on belief, unacknowledged, in how the faith is so weak it needs that level of defence.
Their faith is so important an insult to it is incredibly important. But seeing a silly cartoon as a significant insult is a sign of weakness no matter how strongly they think of their faith. Plenty of very devout people, most of them in fact, may be terribly insulted by it and not only don't get murderous they don't join angry demonstrations. So the analogy about battering their children is nonsense, since that cannot and should not be ignored, whereas a cartoon already is by most people of the faith.
If even most very devout people can not get whipped up into a mob about it despite being so insulted, every devout person can. It's not a sign of how important their faith is, since others of equal faith don't do it, so it must be insecurity.
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
Are you surprised that the Lib Dems are sinking into oblivion? Really those that held their nose and voted Tory should be going over to the yellows, at least in the mid-term polling that we have now.
Someone posted the state EV voting figures for Texas earlier, i think Harris was slightly under the overall % vs 2016, though not by much, but the more it exceeds 2016 the better for Biden for sure. Still a few days to go of course as well
Looking to boost the Hispanic vote then, but the fact they are sending Harris there with just a few days to go rather than one of the more obvious swing states, suggests they are confident (or over confident) we shall see.
Quite so. I don't doubt that some of the angry protests we see around the world are genuine in their feeling, and I accept that for people of strong faith it may well hurt to see mocking or insulting depictions of their religous figures and symbols. But it always just makes me think how weak and insecure they must think their religion is, that some spotty bloke drawing a cartoon must be killed or intimidated for their doodling.
Far from a demonstartion of how strong and important their faith is, it makes it seem like they are saying their faith can be defeated by a cartoon.
That is to misunderstand the worldview. I mentioned before - read the story of the human beings who created the Reformation. Charming, literate, well educated men (and women). Who believed so fundamentally in their truth that being burned at the stake was simply a test. Or burning people at the stake for that matter. They believed utterly, totally, and without doubt. Religion *was* their lives.
In such a context, an insult to their religion is as if you battered their small children. An attack on their very core, on their life itself.
No, I get that it is incredibly central to a great many people. But however they feel, that they have it so centrally to their identities that a puerile insult causes some to be murderous and thousands to attend stupid demonstrations calling on boycotts and intimidation and probably supportive of murderous behaviour (or at least excusing it with weaksauce 'Wrong, but the insult was also wrong' crap), demonstrate that the centrality is based on belief, unacknowledged, in how the faith is so weak it needs that level of defence.
Their faith is so important an insult to it is incredibly important. But seeing a silly cartoon as a significant insult is a sign of weakness no matter how strongly they think of their faith. Plenty of very devout people, most of them in fact, may be terribly insulted by it and not only don't get murderous they don't join angry demonstrations. So the analogy about battering their children is nonsense, since that cannot and should not be ignored, whereas a cartoon already is by most people of the faith.
If even most very devout people can not get whipped up into a mob about it despite being so insulted, every devout person can. It's not a sign of how important their faith is, since others of equal faith don't do it, so it must be insecurity.
There are plenty of other religions available which come complete with bright-eyed lunatics.
The best thing the tories could do at the moment is to STFU about this, and let it play out.
Reminding the country that Starmer has kicked out Corbyn will play well with voters who like Starmer but were put off by Corbyn's Labour.
Put off to the extent that his best vote share at GE's was only bettered by Blair in recent times, and his worst was better than Brown and Miliband's?
How can people ignore those facts? I find it incredible from anyone interested in serious analysis
Fans of single data points might like that type of analysis, but I'm looking at
1) The relative Tory lead in 2019 (from which the next election flows) which is nearly double what happened in 2010 and 2015.
2) Again look at the seat numbers, his very worst was one of Labour's very worst.
Ooooh you are so clever, I forgot haha!!
He attracted more supporters than people who dislike his politics are prepared to give him credit for, and they assume that those supporters will just turn up and vote for the people who kicked him out. I'd say they are more likely to make him a martyr
In both elections he contested he also saw the Tory vote share (and actual votes) increase to levels not seen for over a quarter of a century/thirty years.
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
Are you surprised that the Lib Dems are sinking into oblivion? Really those that held their nose and voted Tory should be going over to the yellows, at least in the mid-term polling that we have now.
LDs do well when Labour are electable and badly otherwise. Centrist Tories and old fashioned liberals are reluctant to vote for them if it could lead to a Corbyn/Foot type government. That fear will have reduced today. The LDs need to have a better platform though and move away from Brexit.
The Alliance did well in 1983 and 1987 when Labour was weak.
Well the silence from both sides has been deafening for the past few days. Which is usually a good sign.
I suspect it will end with a win for the EU on LPF but tucked away in small print and a win for the UK on fish presented in such a way as Boris can claim total victory.
Spot on. And that's OK if that what it takes to avoid a No Deal crash out.
The other thing to look for is whether there's an extended transition (presumably well-disguised and creatively named) in the package.
It sums things up quite well really. He can almost say all the right things, he almost manages to sound sincere about it, but he just cannot help slipping slightly.
Quite so. I don't doubt that some of the angry protests we see around the world are genuine in their feeling, and I accept that for people of strong faith it may well hurt to see mocking or insulting depictions of their religous figures and symbols. But it always just makes me think how weak and insecure they must think their religion is, that some spotty bloke drawing a cartoon must be killed or intimidated for their doodling.
Far from a demonstartion of how strong and important their faith is, it makes it seem like they are saying their faith can be defeated by a cartoon.
That is to misunderstand the worldview. I mentioned before - read the story of the human beings who created the Reformation. Charming, literate, well educated men (and women). Who believed so fundamentally in their truth that being burned at the stake was simply a test. Or burning people at the stake for that matter. They believed utterly, totally, and without doubt. Religion *was* their lives.
In such a context, an insult to their religion is as if you battered their small children. An attack on their very core, on their life itself.
No, I get that it is incredibly central to a great many people. But however they feel, that they have it so centrally to their identities that a puerile insult causes some to be murderous and thousands to attend stupid demonstrations calling on boycotts and intimidation and probably supportive of murderous behaviour (or at least excusing it with weaksauce 'Wrong, but the insult was also wrong' crap), demonstrate that the centrality is based on belief, unacknowledged, in how the faith is so weak it needs that level of defence.
Their faith is so important an insult to it is incredibly important. But seeing a silly cartoon as a significant insult is a sign of weakness no matter how strongly they think of their faith. Plenty of very devout people, most of them in fact, may be terribly insulted by it and not only don't get murderous they don't join angry demonstrations. So the analogy about battering their children is nonsense, since that cannot and should not be ignored, whereas a cartoon already is by most people of the faith.
If even most very devout people can not get whipped up into a mob about it despite being so insulted, every devout person can. It's not a sign of how important their faith is, since others of equal faith don't do it, so it must be insecurity.
There are plenty of other religions available which come complete with bright-eyed lunatics.
Never claimed otherwise. And lunatics and fanatics do not only come with religion, but other ideologies.
It sums things up quite well really. He can almost say all the right things, he almost manages to sound sincere about it, but he just cannot help slipping slightly.
This surprises me, I must admit. There is the benefit of showing that "Under New Leadership" is no empty slogan. Against this is the risk of internal warfare in the party. I would have said the potential damage is greater than the benefit but it looks like Starmer disagrees. Let's see how the Left react.
He’s a f*cking anti-Semite and you would have ZERO tolerance for a clear and obvious racist in the Tory party. Your true colours are showing.
My "true colours". Oh dear. C'mon.
Despite writing countless posts on here that are not - cough - completely free of racist sentiment I have noticed that you tend to become apoplectic about antisemitism on the Left and in the Labour Party.
Why is this? I bet you can't explain it to my satisfaction.
Interestingly there is a poll of American Jews which goes 75-22 for Biden. One of findings is that they're less impressed by Trumps moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem and being the 'most pro Israeli President in US history' than they are by his support for white supremicists at home. This is something little understood by the many Faragist/Johnsonites shouting anti-semite at Corbyn who post here.
That's good to hear. Trump's attempted appeal to Jews is as crass and disrespectful as his pitch to women and Blacks.
True. Trump gave blacks jobs in record high numbers.
Fascist.
This is a rather unfortunate post.
(i) Donald Trump inherited a strong economy and proceeded to fire it up further with a big tax cut funded on the never never. Jobs were created and employment (including amongst black people) duly went up until Covid spoilt the party.
(ii) "Trump gave blacks jobs in record high numbers."
What sort of mind turns the truth of (i) into the dumb racist propaganda of (ii)?
Someone posted the state EV voting figures for Texas earlier, i think Harris was slightly under the overall % vs 2016, though not by much, but the more it exceeds 2016 the better for Biden for sure. Still a few days to go of course as well
Looking to boost the Hispanic vote then, but the fact they are sending Harris there with just a few days to go rather than one of the more obvious swing states, suggests they are confident (or over confident) we shall see.
Yes, it's a puzzle as to whether it's real, or just a 'maybe next time'.
Comments
He managed to attract supporters, but he managed to attract people to vote for his opponents.
Yes, he decided to cut the pay of the SAS, SBS etc overnight.....
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/houston-voters-are-turning-out-record-numbers-could-they-flip-n1245165
But others do and see them as perpetual victims that need special treatment.
In fairness, both were Brexit elections and not really so much about party loyalty. Still I think there are lots of voters in inner London who want to vote for Corbyn's politics, maybe he and his cronies should take the new management on
https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1321832263877877762
However I do believe anti-Semitic discourse is now readily accepted on the mainstream Left in a way it isn’t on the right (tho it was, once). Look at these people attending a Corbyn rally. They clearly think it’s OK to say this stuff into a camera.
https://twitter.com/socialm85897394/status/1202531867863474176?s=21
A lot of people are quite naive about what is happening.
Oh wait....
Fascist.
The Lib Dems have been poorly led for a while.
When the history books are written one of the great political failures of the last 100 years will be the Lib Dems going all Pro Remain and only managing hoover up 11% of the electorate.
All groups are guilty of it to an extent, but you'd think that people committed to historical materialism would be more able to recognise it when it happens.
Whereas most of the hard left now either actively engage in anti-Jewish racism, or shill for those who engage in it.
I see levelling off in Northern Ireland certainly.
Otherwise looks a pretty steady growth of around 20%/week in England to me.
Two generations of anti-Israeli discourse on the left (much of it justified, re the Israeli government) has now morphed into open contempt, dislike, hatred of Jews, and because the Left sees itself as morally beyond reproach, they feel free to express it openly, as so many in their social/political circles agree entirely. Then they are genuinely shocked when others are horrified.
That’s the problem. That’s the hole Corbyn has fallen into. It is sad.
His famously mild manner notwithstanding, he really is a terribly vain old man. He cannot countenance being wrong, even in a limited way, he just has to add that little extra to exculpate himself, and undermining any other words he might utilise.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/44-of-uk-muslims-back-anti-semitic-conspiracy-theories-poll-finds/
Bravely gives people nasty nicknames on Twitter.
Bravely sucks up to fascist dictators.
Bravely pretends he needs to go to hospital with Covid when he doesn't.
Bravely allows supporters to get hypothermia waiting hours for him to speak.
Bravely encourages people to spread coronavirus.
Bravely condones white supremacist violence from a safe distance.
Bravely mocks the fallen of two world wars.
Bravely assaults women then pays them off.
Guy's just a total hero.
In the Arab world in general, Israel is very often referred to as "The Jews". What would be regarded in the UK as anti-semitic statements are common places. The dictatorial states have used the Jewish bogeyman as the reason/excuse etc for their failings and repressions. So it is very common for people from those societies - having been steeped in this for generations - to express such views.
When you mix this with the modern belief that you can't punch down - telling off minority groups is a no no - then you have an environment where such language is bouncing around unchallenged.
...
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1321835102356328451
Let's suppose that Corbyn and friends set up their own party of the left. What vote share would that get them? - maybe 5-10%. How many seats would they win? - maybe 1-2 if some defectors had a high personal vote.
Anyway again this gets away from the point you made and which I responded to (this is like a discussion with HYUFD re the tangents one goes off on) which is comparing 'white lives matter' to 'black lives matter'.
One is a campaign slogan, the other is crass shouted by someone who is almost certainly a bigot.
Far from a demonstartion of how strong and important their faith is, it makes it seem like they are saying their faith can be defeated by a cartoon.
On the right, the great replacement theory stuff has bubbled away for decades, but obviously Trump has managed to embolden a lot of groups to be much more open about this crazy conspiracy theory.
If we thought the reaction to 2008 crash could have been unstabling, the path out of COVID is far more dangerous.
Unfollow perhaps?
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1321462253506486273
But, I'd accept that even Steve Bell is entitled to draw his unfunny cartoons.
https://twitter.com/Baddiel/status/1321781024498569216?s=20
EDIT But I decided not to bother
In such a context, an insult to their religion is as if you battered their small children. An attack on their very core, on their life itself.
https://twitter.com/sianberry/status/1321825660030095361
We also got away with the first wave of it pretty lightly. At the moment, however, the Derry area apparently has a rate of infection that left Liverpool looking like an also ran.
Apart from Ramsay MAC, mentioned upthread, the only other former British party leader of a party in Parliament who was suspended by his successor (and predecessor) was the Marquis of Hartington, leader of the Liberals from 1875-80. In 1886 he voted against Gladstone’s Home Rule Bill, and as a result was driven from the cabinet and joined the opposition. Whether you would count that as a formal ‘suspension’ I don’t know, but it should be noted that most of his more prominent supporters were not sacked. Party structures were more fluid and the leader had much less formal influence over who was or wasn’t a member of the party.
Gladstone was then defeated and instead of resigning, as he should have done, called an election, which split the party between him and Hartington. In the next 134 years, they have won one election in their own strength.
If you do count that, you might also consider the example of Peel in 1846, who was driven out of the Protectionists by Bentinck’s hatred of him, and whose followers eventually helped found the Liberal party in 1859. Or Lloyd George, who in 1931 was removed as Liberal leader and sat as part of an independent caucus of four for refusing to support the National Government (he rejoined the Liberals In 1935).
But I think we would need to nail down what you mean by a ‘leader’ and also what you mean by ‘suspended.’
Their faith is so important an insult to it is incredibly important. But seeing a silly cartoon as a significant insult is a sign of weakness no matter how strongly they think of their faith. Plenty of very devout people, most of them in fact, may be terribly insulted by it and not only don't get murderous they don't join angry demonstrations. So the analogy about battering their children is nonsense, since that cannot and should not be ignored, whereas a cartoon already is by most people of the faith.
If even most very devout people can not get whipped up into a mob about it despite being so insulted, every devout person can. It's not a sign of how important their faith is, since others of equal faith don't do it, so it must be insecurity.
What did I miss?
https://youtu.be/2pySMwD0MNw
It sums things up quite well really. He can almost say all the right things, he almost manages to sound sincere about it, but he just cannot help slipping slightly.
(i) Donald Trump inherited a strong economy and proceeded to fire it up further with a big tax cut funded on the never never. Jobs were created and employment (including amongst black people) duly went up until Covid spoilt the party.
(ii) "Trump gave blacks jobs in record high numbers."
What sort of mind turns the truth of (i) into the dumb racist propaganda of (ii)?
Is it a dumb racist one?
That's quite a Freudian admission. He thinks the problem is people making an issue of it.
Is there anything in this data ?
https://twitter.com/b3nshoe/status/1320892372323078144