TBH I'm not particularly concerned about a US-UK trade deal. We are doing very well as things stand trading with the US on WTO terms.
We have a huge trade surplus with the USA as it is. Any trade deal would benefit the US far more than it would benefit us.
I think making it easier for professionals to work in the UK and USA, respectively, would be of benefit as would making it easier for us to export and deliver financial services.
But, I have no desire to adopt their agricultural standards unless they level up or are equivalent.
You will not get to pick and choose, they really do hold all the cards.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
Over the coming months, senior Republicans and Democrats are going to have to find a way to talk to the Trump constituency without insulting them. If they don’t, then it will just be a matter of time before another ranting populist lures them away. And the next one might be less obviously absurd.
Janet Daly - Telegraph
Senior Republicans have been 'talking' and dog whistling to them for the last 4 years, to the point of going native. The GOP needs a DeTrumpification programme before pious talk of reaching out has any currency.
Yes, I think the notion the Dems must reach out to Trumpers is a bit rich. Also not a good idea electorally. It's more important they do not lose their own base and they would if they seek to accommodate Trumpers in any way that goes beyond refraining from gratuitous insults. The left of the party played a key part in the Biden win.
Andrew Yang was making a similar point, but in a more sensible fashion - that the Democratic Party needed to look at why their message wasn't selling to large chunks of working class Americans.
His view was that it was messaging - "Defund the Police" sounds like a call to anarchy. Which isn't what even those hit most by police racism (the poor black communities) want. What they want is a reduction in violence. Leading to a reduction in incarceration.
Over the coming months, senior Republicans and Democrats are going to have to find a way to talk to the Trump constituency without insulting them. If they don’t, then it will just be a matter of time before another ranting populist lures them away. And the next one might be less obviously absurd.
Janet Daly - Telegraph
Senior Republicans have been 'talking' and dog whistling to them for the last 4 years, to the point of going native. The GOP needs a DeTrumpification programme before pious talk of reaching out has any currency.
Yes, I think the notion the Dems must reach out to Trumpers is a bit rich. Also not a good idea electorally. It's more important they do not lose their own base and they would if they seek to accommodate Trumpers in any way that goes beyond refraining from gratuitous insults. The left of the party played a key part in the Biden win.
Have to say I completely disagree. Those who voted for Trump are not all "Trumpers", many are moderate Republicans who are socially conservative and economically supportive of tax cuts, reduced public spending etc. Don't forget for many Americans Trump has delivered - the wealthiest have done very well out of the past four years and I suspect there are many who feared a Democrat administration (especially if it controlled the Executive and the Legislature) would bring in economic policies they can't support.
IF the GOP ends up controlling the Senate, it will act as a curb on some of the more radical aspects of the Democrat programme and it may well be, as one or two have postulated, the most desirable outcome.
It may well be Nancy Pelosi has been undermined by this and we are seeing McConnell starting to break away from Trump. The new GOP caucus can of course decide they want to take a more adversarial line with the new Biden administration or they can seek to be more pragmatic and bi-partisan.
Over the coming months, senior Republicans and Democrats are going to have to find a way to talk to the Trump constituency without insulting them. If they don’t, then it will just be a matter of time before another ranting populist lures them away. And the next one might be less obviously absurd.
Janet Daly - Telegraph
Senior Republicans have been 'talking' and dog whistling to them for the last 4 years, to the point of going native. The GOP needs a DeTrumpification programme before pious talk of reaching out has any currency.
Yes, I think the notion the Dems must reach out to Trumpers is a bit rich. Also not a good idea electorally. It's more important they do not lose their own base and they would if they seek to accommodate Trumpers in any way that goes beyond refraining from gratuitous insults. The left of the party played a key part in the Biden win.
Given the results in the Senate, House, and State legislatures, however, they probably don't have any option but to reach out.
I know its predicated on the situation being different, but for the same reason I thought Boris would win if he got past the MPs, I can't see Hunt winning unless it's a coronation or moderate (or at least more standard) fix. Granted, the labour membership went for the sensible option right after Corbyn, but Corbyn lost and left, Boris going would be before a GE defeat and clearly forced on him, his supporters would be livid.
I think hes going nowhere.
I don't agree with this because his supporters are no longer his supporters - I've been speaking to a few recently; Boris is rapidly running out of road.
I think everyone is still focussed on fighting the last war and, like my header points out, assuming Boris's successor must be someone suitably tub-thumping and hardcore.
Sensible Tories will see the need for competent stable Government after Boris and all the drama and uncertainty of recent years - it'll be their only chance to win in GE2024 - and remember the membership elected Cameron over Davis and (as WilliamGlenn reminded me) were more tempted by May than Johnson in 2016.
You are asking we onlookers to assess what proportion of Tories are sensible. A question most of us will struggle to answer.
Nice thread header, and well argued case. I had to check it was a Sunday morning
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
The refusal to accept Leave won delayed matters and it took Boris as PM to hammer the point home, but it would be good to have some kind of neutral PM next time - I had hoped we could leave the same types in charge post Brexit, knowing they had listened to and acknowledged the view of the 52%, but they couldn't do it. Maybe now is the time
Now the 48% just gets ignored instead. You only care about unity when it is your side winning.
I wouldn't say so. The 48% managed to delay Brexit for nearly 4 years, and twice had the chance to elect governments that would overturn the decision
Now we have a HofC that represents both Leave and Remain. From 2010-2016, when a majority of voters wanted to Leave, the parliamentary bias was overwhelmingly Remain. UKIP got 13% of the vote for 0.0625% of the seats
So why are we leaving on a deal which is the hardest Brexit apart from No Deal? How is that unity?
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
... and by old maids bicycling to holy communion through the morning mist?
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
Watching fox news for a few days, their guests are actually mostly in favour of legalising cannabis. Its inevitable in the US and where they lead on this Europe will follow. Prohibition has failed. Bigly.
There are plenty of people here who remained opposed, like Dr Foxy and Cyclefree I believe, but it doesn't seem anything would be able to convince the hard core doubters, whilst the number who support or don't care rises. People seem to smoke the stuff pretty openly in the streets, so it feels like the police think they have bigger problems wto worry about than make people worried about being arrested for it.
Yes meanwhile the criminal underworld make billions which gives them more power in other crime, corruption and raises the levels of violence they use. It is madness. Not on the agenda here, but with more and more US states (11 all adults, 34 medical purposes and 5 more just voted it legal this election) it soon will be.
Hmm, interesting this is a close result but Brexit was decisive isn't it Darren?
Why do people listen to this guy, he's evidently a partisan moron who gives Tories a bad name
They listen to him because the various cases against him propelled him to significance. Given the cases have largely (or completely, I don't remember) failed, it was a tremendous waste of time which has made a career for the guy instead.
It wasn’t the landslide that many predicted (and hoped for, myself included) but it wasn’t close either. The idea that it was is part of the mythology Trumpers are trying to establish.
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Over the coming months, senior Republicans and Democrats are going to have to find a way to talk to the Trump constituency without insulting them. If they don’t, then it will just be a matter of time before another ranting populist lures them away. And the next one might be less obviously absurd.
Janet Daly - Telegraph
Senior Republicans have been 'talking' and dog whistling to them for the last 4 years, to the point of going native. The GOP needs a DeTrumpification programme before pious talk of reaching out has any currency.
Yes, I think the notion the Dems must reach out to Trumpers is a bit rich. Also not a good idea electorally. It's more important they do not lose their own base and they would if they seek to accommodate Trumpers in any way that goes beyond refraining from gratuitous insults. The left of the party played a key part in the Biden win.
Have to say I completely disagree. Those who voted for Trump are not all "Trumpers", many are moderate Republicans who are socially conservative and economically supportive of tax cuts, reduced public spending etc. Don't forget for many Americans Trump has delivered - the wealthiest have done very well out of the past four years and I suspect there are many who feared a Democrat administration (especially if it controlled the Executive and the Legislature) would bring in economic policies they can't support.
IF the GOP ends up controlling the Senate, it will act as a curb on some of the more radical aspects of the Democrat programme and it may well be, as one or two have postulated, the most desirable outcome.
It may well be Nancy Pelosi has been undermined by this and we are seeing McConnell starting to break away from Trump. The new GOP caucus can of course decide they want to take a more adversarial line with the new Biden administration or they can seek to be more pragmatic and bi-partisan.
The Democrats would need 55+ in the Senate to be really radical.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
I can see why you'd object to what you describe, and I would too. But as an unapologetic former communist (my only complaint is that democratic communism doesn't seem to happen in practice, and I value democracy more than any political belief) with quite a few seriously Marxist friends, I don't recognise most of that. I think you've constructed a straw man to dislike, akin to the "evil capitalist" of left-wing mythology. Insofar as any of us try to be politically correct or woke, it simply comes down to not causing unnecessary offence to people of other backgrounds - just politeness, really.
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
I'm about 99% sure tonnes of people think I'm woke as hell and yet even I don't fit into Casino Royale's definition, so nobody here does either. Yet he still calls people that quite often.
Basically "Woke" means something that CR doesn't like. He uses the word in the Humpty Dumty style.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
... and by old maids bicycling to holy communion through the morning mist?
Given the popularity of true crime books, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Absolutely agree with this article. If Hunt became leader I would probably rejoin the party and I think a lot of others would too. He would be a unity candidate
Trouble is, I think you and others would have first to rejoin to give him any chance.
Nice thread header, and well argued case. I had to check it was a Sunday morning
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
The refusal to accept Leave won delayed matters and it took Boris as PM to hammer the point home, but it would be good to have some kind of neutral PM next time - I had hoped we could leave the same types in charge post Brexit, knowing they had listened to and acknowledged the view of the 52%, but they couldn't do it. Maybe now is the time
Now the 48% just gets ignored instead. You only care about unity when it is your side winning.
I wouldn't say so. The 48% managed to delay Brexit for nearly 4 years, and twice had the chance to elect governments that would overturn the decision
Now we have a HofC that represents both Leave and Remain. From 2010-2016, when a majority of voters wanted to Leave, the parliamentary bias was overwhelmingly Remain. UKIP got 13% of the vote for 0.0625% of the seats
So why are we leaving on a deal which is the hardest Brexit apart from No Deal? How is that unity?
How many Remainers voted for May's deal ?
Apart from Ken Clarke, Carolyn Flint and Stephen Lloyd there's not many Remain politicians who came out well between June 2016 and December 2019.
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Those who thought it a good idea to import cheap labour to the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
... and by old maids bicycling to holy communion through the morning mist?
Given the popularity of true crime books, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Did most viewers watch Crimewatch because they thought they might be able to provide information or because they found it entertaining?
Over the coming months, senior Republicans and Democrats are going to have to find a way to talk to the Trump constituency without insulting them. If they don’t, then it will just be a matter of time before another ranting populist lures them away. And the next one might be less obviously absurd.
Janet Daly - Telegraph
Senior Republicans have been 'talking' and dog whistling to them for the last 4 years, to the point of going native. The GOP needs a DeTrumpification programme before pious talk of reaching out has any currency.
Yes, I think the notion the Dems must reach out to Trumpers is a bit rich. Also not a good idea electorally. It's more important they do not lose their own base and they would if they seek to accommodate Trumpers in any way that goes beyond refraining from gratuitous insults. The left of the party played a key part in the Biden win.
Andrew Yang was making a similar point, but in a more sensible fashion - that the Democratic Party needed to look at why their message wasn't selling to large chunks of working class Americans.
His view was that it was messaging - "Defund the Police" sounds like a call to anarchy. Which isn't what even those hit most by police racism (the poor black communities) want. What they want is a reduction in violence. Leading to a reduction in incarceration.
Along with Buttigieg, Yang has been the most impressive of the Democratic class of 2020.
Hmm, interesting this is a close result but Brexit was decisive isn't it Darren?
Why do people listen to this guy, he's evidently a partisan moron who gives Tories a bad name
They listen to him because the various cases against him propelled him to significance. Given the cases have largely (or completely, I don't remember) failed, it was a tremendous waste of time which has made a career for the guy instead.
It wasn’t the landslide that many predicted (and hoped for, myself included) but it wasn’t close either. The idea that it was is part of the mythology Trumpers are trying to establish.
It was a rejection of Trump's incompetence (and general sordidness) rather than the things Trump promised (but didn't deliver).
Nice thread header, and well argued case. I had to check it was a Sunday morning
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
The refusal to accept Leave won delayed matters and it took Boris as PM to hammer the point home, but it would be good to have some kind of neutral PM next time - I had hoped we could leave the same types in charge post Brexit, knowing they had listened to and acknowledged the view of the 52%, but they couldn't do it. Maybe now is the time
Now the 48% just gets ignored instead. You only care about unity when it is your side winning.
I wouldn't say so. The 48% managed to delay Brexit for nearly 4 years, and twice had the chance to elect governments that would overturn the decision
Now we have a HofC that represents both Leave and Remain. From 2010-2016, when a majority of voters wanted to Leave, the parliamentary bias was overwhelmingly Remain. UKIP got 13% of the vote for 0.0625% of the seats
So why are we leaving on a deal which is the hardest Brexit apart from No Deal? How is that unity?
I suppose the reason for that, if it is true, is that Remain MP's, elected to honour the referendum result, gambled on overturning it rather than vote for May's deal
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
Watching fox news for a few days, their guests are actually mostly in favour of legalising cannabis. Its inevitable in the US and where they lead on this Europe will follow. Prohibition has failed. Bigly.
There are plenty of people here who remained opposed, like Dr Foxy and Cyclefree I believe, but it doesn't seem anything would be able to convince the hard core doubters, whilst the number who support or don't care rises. People seem to smoke the stuff pretty openly in the streets, so it feels like the police think they have bigger problems wto worry about than make people worried about being arrested for it.
Yes meanwhile the criminal underworld make billions which gives them more power in other crime, corruption and raises the levels of violence they use. It is madness. Not on the agenda here, but with more and more US states (11 all adults, 34 medical purposes and 5 more just voted it legal this election) it soon will be.
Wont someone think of the sicarios working in Mexican Drug Cartels?
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
I can remember a barrister, noted for his association with the cheeky crappies in question, declaring it was monstrous and unfair that the police were ambushing armed robbers, while wearing body armour and carrying accurate, powerful weapons.
Apparently surrounding them, shouting out "Armed Police!", waiting to be shot at and then returning fire was Not Cricket....
The disappearance of cash helped. Banks installed cameras and bandit screens. Security companies used tamper-proof cases. But mainly firms stopped paying wages in cash. (My first job included writing out pay packets once a week; these would then go to the cashiers (ask your granny) to be filled with cash.) Get The Sweeney box set for Christmas and half the plots could never happen now.
Hmm, interesting this is a close result but Brexit was decisive isn't it Darren?
Why do people listen to this guy, he's evidently a partisan moron who gives Tories a bad name
They listen to him because the various cases against him propelled him to significance. Given the cases have largely (or completely, I don't remember) failed, it was a tremendous waste of time which has made a career for the guy instead.
It wasn’t the landslide that many predicted (and hoped for, myself included) but it wasn’t close either. The idea that it was is part of the mythology Trumpers are trying to establish.
His half-baked claim about close elections is just that. If Biden gets more than a 4% lead in the pv, that'll be bigger than 4 out of 5 of the last elections and 7 out of the 18 elections since the war.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
... and by old maids bicycling to holy communion through the morning mist?
Given the popularity of true crime books, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Did most viewers watch Crimewatch because they thought they might be able to provide information or because they found it entertaining?
That's perhaps different - it did present the polis' and victims' point of view. But, yes, the general theme is clear.
Over the coming months, senior Republicans and Democrats are going to have to find a way to talk to the Trump constituency without insulting them. If they don’t, then it will just be a matter of time before another ranting populist lures them away. And the next one might be less obviously absurd.
Janet Daly - Telegraph
Senior Republicans have been 'talking' and dog whistling to them for the last 4 years, to the point of going native. The GOP needs a DeTrumpification programme before pious talk of reaching out has any currency.
Yes, I think the notion the Dems must reach out to Trumpers is a bit rich. Also not a good idea electorally. It's more important they do not lose their own base and they would if they seek to accommodate Trumpers in any way that goes beyond refraining from gratuitous insults. The left of the party played a key part in the Biden win.
Andrew Yang was making a similar point, but in a more sensible fashion - that the Democratic Party needed to look at why their message wasn't selling to large chunks of working class Americans.
His view was that it was messaging - "Defund the Police" sounds like a call to anarchy. Which isn't what even those hit most by police racism (the poor black communities) want. What they want is a reduction in violence. Leading to a reduction in incarceration.
Along with Buttigieg, Yang has been the most impressive of the Democratic class of 2020.
I don't agree with all his solutions, but Yang had done some proper thinking about the problems facing the western world in the coming years. Very few politicians appear to have, let alone have any solutions. Banning driverless trains and nationalising everything don't count. As Yang identified, promising things like $15/hr sounds good, but in many sectors simply increase the rate of automation of those jobs
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Those who thought it a good idea to import cheap labour to the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor
Migrants are people who choose to move, not objects that are imported.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
I can see why you'd object to what you describe, and I would too. But as an unapologetic former communist (my only complaint is that democratic communism doesn't seem to happen in practice, and I value democracy more than any political belief) with quite a few seriously Marxist friends, I don't recognise most of that. I think you've constructed a straw man to dislike, akin to the "evil capitalist" of left-wing mythology. Insofar as any of us try to be politically correct or woke, it simply comes down to not causing unnecessary offence to people of other backgrounds - just politeness, really.
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
If you are “unapologetic” given the millions whose lives were ruined or terminated under communist rule, and the tens of millions who lived one out-of-place comment away from the same fate, you deserve no greater hearing on this forum than someone who might pop up to declare themselves an unapologetic “former” Nazi.
The charity you work for is the one I have supported for the longest period of my adult life. But your posts are pushing me toward the point where I’ll be writing to them explaining why my annual contributions are finished.
He looks awful, poor man, I really genuinely fear for his health. To see somebody in this state in such a difficult job is something I wouldn't wish on anyone.
I just watched it but with the sound off to check your comment.
Tbh, I don't think he looks any worse than usual (though I agree, a good haircut would help). Why does he always have to have a smirk on his face though?
He can't get the veep's name right. Good start.
Unprofessional, discourteous and literally incredible given Kamala Harris has been all over the telly these past weeks. It is the same arrogant rank amateurism that leads Boris to wing it at Covid briefings so that he gets the details wrong when answering questions.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
Watching fox news for a few days, their guests are actually mostly in favour of legalising cannabis. Its inevitable in the US and where they lead on this Europe will follow. Prohibition has failed. Bigly.
There are plenty of people here who remained opposed, like Dr Foxy and Cyclefree I believe, but it doesn't seem anything would be able to convince the hard core doubters, whilst the number who support or don't care rises. People seem to smoke the stuff pretty openly in the streets, so it feels like the police think they have bigger problems wto worry about than make people worried about being arrested for it.
Yes meanwhile the criminal underworld make billions which gives them more power in other crime, corruption and raises the levels of violence they use. It is madness. Not on the agenda here, but with more and more US states (11 all adults, 34 medical purposes and 5 more just voted it legal this election) it soon will be.
Wont someone think of the sicarios working in Mexican Drug Cartels?
#EveryTorturerAndMurderersJobMatters
i did get a bit hooked on Narco TV during lockdown. Ozark was the gateway, then Queen of the South, Escobar and Narcos. Narcos Mexico next.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
I can see why you'd object to what you describe, and I would too. But as an unapologetic former communist (my only complaint is that democratic communism doesn't seem to happen in practice, and I value democracy more than any political belief) with quite a few seriously Marxist friends, I don't recognise most of that. I think you've constructed a straw man to dislike, akin to the "evil capitalist" of left-wing mythology. Insofar as any of us try to be politically correct or woke, it simply comes down to not causing unnecessary offence to people of other backgrounds - just politeness, really.
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
If you are “unapologetic” given the millions whose lives were ruined or terminated under communist rule, and the tens of millions who lived one out-of-place comment away from the same fate, you deserve no greater hearing on this forum than someone who might pop up to declare themselves an unapologetic “former” Nazi.
The charity you work for is the one I have supported for the longest period of my adult life. But your posts are pushing me toward the point where I’ll be writing to them explaining why my annual contributions are finished.
We've had this discussion numerous times on here. The reply - and I think it carries some weight - is that gulags and show trials weren't baked into the communist theory in the way that the Final Solution was with Nazism.
Edit. That's not to say that communism isn't a crap theory - it is. It's just inherently crap rather than inherently wicked.
Hmm, interesting this is a close result but Brexit was decisive isn't it Darren?
Why do people listen to this guy, he's evidently a partisan moron who gives Tories a bad name
They listen to him because the various cases against him propelled him to significance. Given the cases have largely (or completely, I don't remember) failed, it was a tremendous waste of time which has made a career for the guy instead.
It wasn’t the landslide that many predicted (and hoped for, myself included) but it wasn’t close either. The idea that it was is part of the mythology Trumpers are trying to establish.
His half-baked claim about close elections is just that. If Biden gets more than a 4% lead in the pv, that'll be bigger than 4 out of 5 of the last elections and 7 out of the 18 elections since the war.
Just imaghine if the Brexiters start agreeing with Mr Trump that a 4 point lead is too close to settle anything.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
Watching fox news for a few days, their guests are actually mostly in favour of legalising cannabis. Its inevitable in the US and where they lead on this Europe will follow. Prohibition has failed. Bigly.
There are plenty of people here who remained opposed, like Dr Foxy and Cyclefree I believe, but it doesn't seem anything would be able to convince the hard core doubters, whilst the number who support or don't care rises. People seem to smoke the stuff pretty openly in the streets, so it feels like the police think they have bigger problems wto worry about than make people worried about being arrested for it.
Yes meanwhile the criminal underworld make billions which gives them more power in other crime, corruption and raises the levels of violence they use. It is madness. Not on the agenda here, but with more and more US states (11 all adults, 34 medical purposes and 5 more just voted it legal this election) it soon will be.
And supplied by Megadope Farms Inc and not by a bunch of old hippies with a few weed plants in the attic.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
Watching fox news for a few days, their guests are actually mostly in favour of legalising cannabis. Its inevitable in the US and where they lead on this Europe will follow. Prohibition has failed. Bigly.
There are plenty of people here who remained opposed, like Dr Foxy and Cyclefree I believe, but it doesn't seem anything would be able to convince the hard core doubters, whilst the number who support or don't care rises. People seem to smoke the stuff pretty openly in the streets, so it feels like the police think they have bigger problems wto worry about than make people worried about being arrested for it.
Yes meanwhile the criminal underworld make billions which gives them more power in other crime, corruption and raises the levels of violence they use. It is madness. Not on the agenda here, but with more and more US states (11 all adults, 34 medical purposes and 5 more just voted it legal this election) it soon will be.
And supplied by Megadope Farms Inc and not by a bunch of old hippies with a few weed plants in the attic.
Actually it is more complicated. Mega corps grow the legal stuff, but because of cost / taxes on it, the cartels grow for the still enormous illegal market (even in states where it is legal). Hippies have been squeezed out from both sides.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
I can remember a barrister, noted for his association with the cheeky crappies in question, declaring it was monstrous and unfair that the police were ambushing armed robbers, while wearing body armour and carrying accurate, powerful weapons.
Apparently surrounding them, shouting out "Armed Police!", waiting to be shot at and then returning fire was Not Cricket....
The disappearance of cash helped. Banks installed cameras and bandit screens. Security companies used tamper-proof cases. But mainly firms stopped paying wages in cash. (My first job included writing out pay packets once a week; these would then go to the cashiers (ask your granny) to be filled with cash.) Get The Sweeney box set for Christmas and half the plots could never happen now.
True. Though the one about the embittered computer expert selling computer generated routes for armoured cars...
Incidentally this is one area that the UK is light years ahead of the US on. Also most of Europe. Cashless life is a fact here*. They banned it in New York - because the shitty financial systems would mean that poor people would be unable to use shops...
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Those who thought it a good idea to import cheap labour to the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor
Migrants are people who choose to move, not objects that are imported.
Yes, I am sure that's how the Remainers making money out of them see it
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
I can see why you'd object to what you describe, and I would too. But as an unapologetic former communist (my only complaint is that democratic communism doesn't seem to happen in practice, and I value democracy more than any political belief) with quite a few seriously Marxist friends, I don't recognise most of that. I think you've constructed a straw man to dislike, akin to the "evil capitalist" of left-wing mythology. Insofar as any of us try to be politically correct or woke, it simply comes down to not causing unnecessary offence to people of other backgrounds - just politeness, really.
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
If you are “unapologetic” given the millions whose lives were ruined or terminated under communist rule, and the tens of millions who lived one out-of-place comment away from the same fate, you deserve no greater hearing on this forum than someone who might pop up to declare themselves an unapologetic “former” Nazi.
The charity you work for is the one I have supported for the longest period of my adult life. But your posts are pushing me toward the point where I’ll be writing to them explaining why my annual contributions are finished.
We've had this discussion numerous times on here. The reply - and I think it carries some weight - is that gulags and show trials weren't baked into the communist theory in the way that the Final Solution was with Nazism.
Naziism was worse than Communism solely because the “mistake” that condemned you to torture and death was unavoidable because of your birth, rather than some trivial (as we would understand it) consequence of what you might happened to have done, for an instant, during your life.
Yet all of us should be eternally grateful that we live our lives freely able to type up here whatever random thoughts enter our minds, without worry as to the future safety or livelihoods of us and our families. It is a privilege, by accident of birth, that none of us should ever take for granted.
Honestly and frankly, Palmer’s glib disregard for the evil and wretched lives that communism has inflicted on so many millions of people during our lifetimes, disgusts me.
If I don’t see some sort of contrition from him here before tomorrow, I will be writing to CIWF (my membership of which dates back forty years) to express my disgust.
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Those who thought it a good idea to import cheap labour to the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor
Migrants are people who choose to move, not objects that are imported.
I'm sure that those who were funnelled into the bottom end jobs on arriving here and then discarded like used Kleenex when they had the temerity to learn enough English to ask for a pay rise, will appreciate the difference.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
... and by old maids bicycling to holy communion through the morning mist?
Given the popularity of true crime books, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Did most viewers watch Crimewatch because they thought they might be able to provide information or because they found it entertaining?
That's perhaps different - it did present the polis' and victims' point of view. But, yes, the general theme is clear.
The funny thing about Crimewatch is most of the useful information phoned in came not from the public but from police and prison officers who recognised their old customers. I do not know if now the Home Office runs a similar internal programme but if not, it probably should.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
You could almost be talking about Johnson and his gang.....
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
I can see why you'd object to what you describe, and I would too. But as an unapologetic former communist (my only complaint is that democratic communism doesn't seem to happen in practice, and I value democracy more than any political belief) with quite a few seriously Marxist friends, I don't recognise most of that. I think you've constructed a straw man to dislike, akin to the "evil capitalist" of left-wing mythology. Insofar as any of us try to be politically correct or woke, it simply comes down to not causing unnecessary offence to people of other backgrounds - just politeness, really.
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
If you are “unapologetic” given the millions whose lives were ruined or terminated under communist rule, and the tens of millions who lived one out-of-place comment away from the same fate, you deserve no greater hearing on this forum than someone who might pop up to declare themselves an unapologetic “former” Nazi.
The charity you work for is the one I have supported for the longest period of my adult life. But your posts are pushing me toward the point where I’ll be writing to them explaining why my annual contributions are finished.
Serious question, do you think the murderous totalitarianism of the Soviet Union or Maoist China is an integral part of communism?
For context, what I'm thinking here it that the ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the Roman Republic isn't something that necessarily happens with republics, and that committed by the British is no indictment of constitutional monarchy. Great crimes do not necessarily mean they flow from that system of government as a matter of course, but I'm not sure about communism. I have other reasons for opposing it, so it's not a deciding question for me, but I've always been unsure about whether the charge really sticks.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
... and by old maids bicycling to holy communion through the morning mist?
Given the popularity of true crime books, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
Did most viewers watch Crimewatch because they thought they might be able to provide information or because they found it entertaining?
That's perhaps different - it did present the polis' and victims' point of view. But, yes, the general theme is clear.
The funny thing about Crimewatch is most of the useful information phoned in came not from the public but from police and prison officers who recognised their old customers. I do not know if now the Home Office runs a similar internal programme but if not, it probably should.
Yes, I worked for the Benefits Agency back in the day, and I believe its staff were enough rich source of information.
Just been sent an email by the National Archives in London highlighting merchandise. This the latest poppy stuff. The purple poppy puzzled me - but apparently in memoriam of horses and other beasts.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
I can see why you'd object to what you describe, and I would too. But as an unapologetic former communist (my only complaint is that democratic communism doesn't seem to happen in practice, and I value democracy more than any political belief) with quite a few seriously Marxist friends, I don't recognise most of that. I think you've constructed a straw man to dislike, akin to the "evil capitalist" of left-wing mythology. Insofar as any of us try to be politically correct or woke, it simply comes down to not causing unnecessary offence to people of other backgrounds - just politeness, really.
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
If you are “unapologetic” given the millions whose lives were ruined or terminated under communist rule, and the tens of millions who lived one out-of-place comment away from the same fate, you deserve no greater hearing on this forum than someone who might pop up to declare themselves an unapologetic “former” Nazi.
The charity you work for is the one I have supported for the longest period of my adult life. But your posts are pushing me toward the point where I’ll be writing to them explaining why my annual contributions are finished.
We've had this discussion numerous times on here. The reply - and I think it carries some weight - is that gulags and show trials weren't baked into the communist theory in the way that the Final Solution was with Nazism.
Edit. That's not to say that communism isn't a crap theory - it is. It's just inherently crap rather than inherently wicked.
The idea that if you don’t follow the party line and if you happen to speak a word out of turn, as reported by a random neighbour, won’t condemn you to a life of slave labour, isn’t “inherently wicked”?
I travelled through Eastern Europe, behind the iron curtain, as a student. The current situation in Poland, eastern Germany, the Chech republic, is the greatest single political achievement I have seen during my lifetime.
If Palmer wants to argue to the contrary, then I am done with him and everything associated with him.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
I can see why you'd object to what you describe, and I would too. But as an unapologetic former communist (my only complaint is that democratic communism doesn't seem to happen in practice, and I value democracy more than any political belief) with quite a few seriously Marxist friends, I don't recognise most of that. I think you've constructed a straw man to dislike, akin to the "evil capitalist" of left-wing mythology. Insofar as any of us try to be politically correct or woke, it simply comes down to not causing unnecessary offence to people of other backgrounds - just politeness, really.
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
If you are “unapologetic” given the millions whose lives were ruined or terminated under communist rule, and the tens of millions who lived one out-of-place comment away from the same fate, you deserve no greater hearing on this forum than someone who might pop up to declare themselves an unapologetic “former” Nazi.
The charity you work for is the one I have supported for the longest period of my adult life. But your posts are pushing me toward the point where I’ll be writing to them explaining why my annual contributions are finished.
We've had this discussion numerous times on here. The reply - and I think it carries some weight - is that gulags and show trials weren't baked into the communist theory in the way that the Final Solution was with Nazism.
Naziism was worse than Communism solely because the “mistake” that condemned you to torture and death was unavoidable because of your birth, rather than some trivial (as we would understand it) consequence of what you might happened to have done, for an instant, during your life.
Yet all of us should be eternally grateful that we live our lives freely able to type up here whatever random thoughts enter our minds, without worry as to the future safety or livelihoods of us and our families. It is a privilege, by accident of birth, that none of us should ever take for granted.
Honestly and frankly, Palmer’s glib disregard for the evil and wretched lives that communism has inflicted on so many millions of people during our lifetimes, disgusts me.
If I don’t see some sort of contrition from him here before tomorrow, I will be writing to CIWF (my membership of which dates back forty years) to express my disgust.
I wish you could see the irony in your priggish comment. First extolling freedom of expression and then refusing to allow it.
If he says “all legal votes should be counted” then he will be slated as a bro-Trumpian facist. (Despite it being an entire reasonable thing to say if you set aside the current political environment and usage of the phrase by Trump).
If he says “all vote should be counted” then he pisses off the person who is still president of the US until Jan 20, 2021 for no gain.
So why say anything? It’s a mischievous question despite Sophy Rodge’s po-faced denial
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
I can see why you'd object to what you describe, and I would too. But as an unapologetic former communist (my only complaint is that democratic communism doesn't seem to happen in practice, and I value democracy more than any political belief) with quite a few seriously Marxist friends, I don't recognise most of that. I think you've constructed a straw man to dislike, akin to the "evil capitalist" of left-wing mythology. Insofar as any of us try to be politically correct or woke, it simply comes down to not causing unnecessary offence to people of other backgrounds - just politeness, really.
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
If you are “unapologetic” given the millions whose lives were ruined or terminated under communist rule, and the tens of millions who lived one out-of-place comment away from the same fate, you deserve no greater hearing on this forum than someone who might pop up to declare themselves an unapologetic “former” Nazi.
The charity you work for is the one I have supported for the longest period of my adult life. But your posts are pushing me toward the point where I’ll be writing to them explaining why my annual contributions are finished.
We've had this discussion numerous times on here. The reply - and I think it carries some weight - is that gulags and show trials weren't baked into the communist theory in the way that the Final Solution was with Nazism.
Naziism was worse than Communism solely because the “mistake” that condemned you to torture and death was unavoidable because of your birth, rather than some trivial (as we would understand it) consequence of what you might happened to have done, for an instant, during your life.
Yet all of us should be eternally grateful that we live our lives freely able to type up here whatever random thoughts enter our minds, without worry as to the future safety or livelihoods of us and our families. It is a privilege, by accident of birth, that none of us should ever take for granted.
Honestly and frankly, Palmer’s glib disregard for the evil and wretched lives that communism has inflicted on so many millions of people during our lifetimes, disgusts me.
If I don’t see some sort of contrition from him here before tomorrow, I will be writing to CIWF (my membership of which dates back forty years) to express my disgust.
Seems a bit daft to punish the charity for a comment on an Internet forum where the poster is one of a minority posting under his own name.
I am not a communist, but I think Nick sympathises more with Eurocommunism than Stalinism or Maoism.
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Those who thought it a good idea to import cheap labour to the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor
Migrants are people who choose to move, not objects that are imported.
Yes, I am sure that's how the Remainers making money out of them see it
I think most people, Remain or Leave, see people as agents who make their own choices, rather than "imports". But I'll let individuals speak for themselves.
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Those who thought it a good idea to import cheap labour to the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor
Migrants are people who choose to move, not objects that are imported.
Yes, I am sure that's how the Remainers making money out of them see it
I think most people, Remain or Leave, see people as agents who make their own choices, rather than "imports". But I'll let individuals speak for themselves.
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Those who thought it a good idea to import cheap labour to the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor
Migrants are people who choose to move, not objects that are imported.
I'm sure that those who were funnelled into the bottom end jobs on arriving here and then discarded like used Kleenex when they had the temerity to learn enough English to ask for a pay rise, will appreciate the difference.
Not sure of the point of your post. Sounds like you're angry at something, but I'm not even sure what.
I'm about 99% sure tonnes of people think I'm woke as hell and yet even I don't fit into Casino Royale's definition, so nobody here does either.
I do.
CR knows absolutely nothing about Marxism though and has obviously read absolutely no Marx or Engels. "Marxist" is just an all purpose pejorative adjective he prepends to things he doesn't like. There's nothing wrong with that; I do the same with the word 'tory'.
To be fair, most "Marxists" I have come across have no understanding of Marxism either. It's a bit like finding Christians who've read the Bible.....
I move in mostly leftwing circles (except at work) and have never met anyone who referred to themselves as a Marxist. To be honest I find the discussions on wokeness etc the most boring thing about this site. It just comes across as a bunch of rural Spectator readers assembling a series of straw men (or straw people as the PC brigade would no doubt make us say these days - see how easy it is!) that they then take an absurd delight in tearing down as if they are delivering some great truth or attacking some great shibboleth. None of it moves the debate forward one millimetre on the many very real issues affecting minority groups, not that it is designed to of course.
I stand by my view that today's "woke" is just yesterday's "PC brigade".
These same people would have been calling those fighting for gay rights woke and PC just a few decades ago.
It's the varying spectrum of these things that is interesting. Multi Culturism, in the capitalised, hard core form, advocated actively preventing integration between communities. And advocates of this then claimed that anyone who didn't sign up to their agenda was against multiple cultures existing in the same country....
Yes, they got it wrong on that occasion and were forced to change tack.
They've got it badly wrong on Woke too but they aren't ready to admit it yet.
It will take electoral reality to do that over the next 10-15 years.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
Living in relationships with people from various cultures, it is quite clear to me that a large amount quantity of this stuff is made up without referencing the people involved.
For example, every time the campaigners went after Operation Trident (or its successors) they found that various communities actually wanted a reduction in the number of young men shooting each other. Less dead people please. Of course, there is an issue of racism in the police. But that, in the UK, doesn't negate the fact that gun crime is largely confined to certain portion of the community*
*You can blame the police for that. Once the modern police firearms units were setup, they finished off** the armed robbery gangs (largely white) in short order. **Sometime literally.
Armed robbers went from being the elite of the underworld to being dinosaurs, over the course of a generation.
Yes, I remember. Not from personal experience but from the news and TV dramas. Pulling off a job on a bank could almost confer National Treasure status. Especially if cockneys who looked like Michael Caine were involved. Now it's all internet conmen and horrid sex things. Yet another part of our heritage gone to the dogs.
The thing is, being a successful armed robber required a good deal of skill and courage. You needed to be willing to shoot, if necessary, without being trigger-happy. You needed a mix of menace and charm, to persuade bank tellers, post-mistresses, etc. to hand over the cash. And, you risked a lengthy prison sentence. But, if you did your time without complaint, you would be hugely respected both in prison, and among the sider criminal class.
I don't want to lionise these individuals. They were dangerous men; some were psychopaths. It is true however that the armed robber enjoyed the highest status amongst criminals, inside and out.
Woke is just a term used to be racist or sexist, or generally horrible that is still acceptable.
No, it really isn't although that's what its defenders (almost always) say in its defence.
Woke is a warped Marxist theory that's transmuted from academia into the real world and views everyone through a complex hierarchical and intersectional power dynamic where we are all classified by race, gender and sexuality and bracketed (and treated) as relative oppressors or victims accordingly. It uses this as a starting point to undercut some of the established values and historical foundations of our society in the hope that by breaking it down something better (Marxist utopia) that they believe will take its place. It cleverly condemns its opponents as racists and sexists to enforce its dogma and silence dissent. It's a big reason why they say "don't expect minorities to educate you on racism" - because they fear they wouldn't be on message; just look at how they attack those who are not - and instead say, please read my favoured best-selling culturally marxist book and 'educate yourself'.
Example: an unWoke person would be concerned that some Black people still experience some racial discrimination in the UK and would want to talk to them about it to understand it and change it. They wouldn't take a knee, tear down statues, or talk about White Privilege. They would emphasis the common-bonds they have of shared Britishness, they would demonstrate empathy they would talk about fairness, and they would talk about opening up opportunities for them and increasing role models. They would try harder to think about things from their point of view in future and bring everyone of all backgrounds, races and politics along with them. They wouldn't plaster what they're doing all over social media out of insecurity narcissism.
A Woke person would say either you buy into the whole lot, or you're suspect.. or worse.
Great post CR.
I don't think it's a particularly great post to be honest and seems to contradict a lot of what he says when he just mindlessly calls others woke.
I don't think anyone here fits into that view of "wokeness" - and I am about 99% sure if you asked the average person what woke means, they would not say that.
For me what being woke is used for is just today's politically correct, it's saying something you know is offensive but you feel like this gives you cover to say it without being challenged. You have an opinion, air it and we will debate it. End of story.
Who's defending saying anything offensive?
I would challenge anyone who said something racist, but I won't go down on one knee, or label myself and others as having White Privilege.
That might get some initial attention, or make sense in an academic thesis, but, when translated into the real world, divides far more people than it unites.
It's been said before that challenging the disgraceful comments Johnson has made about Islam, or Obama, makes you "woke" and "PC". I am not saying that's you, I am saying your definition is not shared by most/many, especially and including the MSM at large who people look to for their definition.
I think that the problem is that Johnson is was journalist with a live of colourful phrases.
The comment about Muslim women in full burkas looting like “letterboxes” was in an article defending their right to do so.
But people have chosen to focus on his perceived insult to Muslim people rather than his defence of their rights.
And yet they idolise Macron who had banned the things.
Funny old world isn’t it when what people say matters more than what they believe
Over the coming months, senior Republicans and Democrats are going to have to find a way to talk to the Trump constituency without insulting them. If they don’t, then it will just be a matter of time before another ranting populist lures them away. And the next one might be less obviously absurd.
Janet Daly - Telegraph
Senior Republicans have been 'talking' and dog whistling to them for the last 4 years, to the point of going native. The GOP needs a DeTrumpification programme before pious talk of reaching out has any currency.
Yes, I think the notion the Dems must reach out to Trumpers is a bit rich. Also not a good idea electorally. It's more important they do not lose their own base and they would if they seek to accommodate Trumpers in any way that goes beyond refraining from gratuitous insults. The left of the party played a key part in the Biden win.
Have to say I completely disagree. Those who voted for Trump are not all "Trumpers", many are moderate Republicans who are socially conservative and economically supportive of tax cuts, reduced public spending etc. Don't forget for many Americans Trump has delivered - the wealthiest have done very well out of the past four years and I suspect there are many who feared a Democrat administration (especially if it controlled the Executive and the Legislature) would bring in economic policies they can't support.
IF the GOP ends up controlling the Senate, it will act as a curb on some of the more radical aspects of the Democrat programme and it may well be, as one or two have postulated, the most desirable outcome.
It may well be Nancy Pelosi has been undermined by this and we are seeing McConnell starting to break away from Trump. The new GOP caucus can of course decide they want to take a more adversarial line with the new Biden administration or they can seek to be more pragmatic and bi-partisan.
When I say Trumpers I mean his personal base not the right leaning voters who plumped for him because he was the Republican candidate. His 70m is split between these 2 tendencies, I don't know exactly in what proportion but both groupings are large.
And I don't want a curb on Dem radicalism. For me, Dem radicalism means addressing the ugly inequalities of American life that no 1st world country should tolerate.
But, yes, they will be boxed in by the overall result, I agree with you there. That's just a fact. So there will be a need to reach out and on that score my opinion of its desirability depends on what they are reaching out to. As examples. To a smaller tax rise than planned? Ok. To a compromise on business regulation? Ok. To a "let it rip" approach to the virus? Not Ok. To a tolerance for racist policing? Not Ok.
Brexit was a kick up the arse for those who had been at the top for the last 20 years or so - continuity Blair. They needed to know people didn't necessarily agree with them, but there was no choice - LibLabCon as they used to say - three cheeks of the same arse under Cam, EdM and Clegg.
You mean the people who presided over our political marginalisation within Europe?
Those who thought it a good idea to import cheap labour to the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor
Migrants are people who choose to move, not objects that are imported.
I'm sure that those who were funnelled into the bottom end jobs on arriving here and then discarded like used Kleenex when they had the temerity to learn enough English to ask for a pay rise, will appreciate the difference.
Not sure of the point of your post. Sounds like you're angry at something, but I'm not even sure what.
The point is that immigration is being used to abuse the immigrants as well. As well as suppressing wages.
Call me an old fashioned neon-fascist-capitalist-imperlialist-ensalver-of-the-oppressed, but a reasonable response to shortage of labour at price x could suggest that x is a bit on the low side...
We should be automating low paid jobs out of existence, not turning humans into low price automation. Progress, I think they call it.
Due to the comparative advantage of moving to low cost locations (China etc) being eroded by the disgusting behaviour of the workers*, simply dumping your manufacturing abroad is no longer automatically super profitable.
The socio-legal-political environment has a major effect on productivity. NHS, Schools, reliable legal system etc etc. So while it is still cheaper per worker, the actual productivity per worker for skilled work is remarkably constant, around the world.
So how to cheat on this?
Well, if you employee people for x times more than they would have earned in their home country - sounds awesome. Since they don't speak the language, they won't know their rights. Yet. A year or 2 down the line, their is a risk they will learn some English and realise how shit the deal they are getting is.... But, hey, there are always more suckers.....
*Asking for a getting pay rises, working conditions that include actual health and safety etc.
Over the coming months, senior Republicans and Democrats are going to have to find a way to talk to the Trump constituency without insulting them. If they don’t, then it will just be a matter of time before another ranting populist lures them away. And the next one might be less obviously absurd.
Janet Daly - Telegraph
Senior Republicans have been 'talking' and dog whistling to them for the last 4 years, to the point of going native. The GOP needs a DeTrumpification programme before pious talk of reaching out has any currency.
Yes, I think the notion the Dems must reach out to Trumpers is a bit rich. Also not a good idea electorally. It's more important they do not lose their own base and they would if they seek to accommodate Trumpers in any way that goes beyond refraining from gratuitous insults. The left of the party played a key part in the Biden win.
Andrew Yang was making a similar point, but in a more sensible fashion - that the Democratic Party needed to look at why their message wasn't selling to large chunks of working class Americans.
His view was that it was messaging - "Defund the Police" sounds like a call to anarchy. Which isn't what even those hit most by police racism (the poor black communities) want. What they want is a reduction in violence. Leading to a reduction in incarceration.
If it's mainly the messaging that will be an easy fix.
But if it's the Rich World working class going rogue as the globalization double whammy hits - (i) reducing their privilege over the Poor World whilst (ii) increasing the gulf between them and the Rich World rich - then it is not so easy.
And of course it's the latter - not easy - scenario. Because if it were easy for the Left to square this circle it would have been done.
If he says “all legal votes should be counted” then he will be slated as a bro-Trumpian facist. (Despite it being an entire reasonable thing to say if you set aside the current political environment and usage of the phrase by Trump).
If he says “all vote should be counted” then he pisses off the person who is still president of the US until Jan 20, 2021 for no gain.
So why say anything? It’s a mischievous question despite Sophy Rodge’s po-faced denial
Should illegal votes be counted, Sophie?
No. Of course not. The issue is the extent of measures to ensure that votes are legal. Where Trump went off the rails was suggesting that votes cast in accordance with legal procedures were automatically illegal - because they didn't vote for him.
This election - in the midst a Covid epidemic ripping through the US almost worse than anywhere else - was always going to be a problem for Trump. Not just because of his past record, but because the widespread use of postal votes to avoid long lines at polling stations allowed a free kick at Bishop Brennan's arse. People who might not have been bothered to go out into the plague pits to cast a vote were happy enough to vote from their armchairs.
There would have to have been a REALLY bad failure of polling to overcome this effect. It wasn't there in the early returns. Hence, I was comfortable in calling a Biden win here at 00.01 am on Wednesday.
As regards Hunts credentials he has the disadvantage of not being in the Cabinet. A Cabinet minister could suprise people with some notable ministrerial work.Liz Truss with good trade deals for example.Or a Cabinet minister could catch the Tory members eye with a popular resignation.
Comments
https://twitter.com/tejmuk/status/1325434274472923139?s=20
His view was that it was messaging - "Defund the Police" sounds like a call to anarchy. Which isn't what even those hit most by police racism (the poor black communities) want. What they want is a reduction in violence. Leading to a reduction in incarceration.
IF the GOP ends up controlling the Senate, it will act as a curb on some of the more radical aspects of the Democrat programme and it may well be, as one or two have postulated, the most desirable outcome.
It may well be Nancy Pelosi has been undermined by this and we are seeing McConnell starting to break away from Trump. The new GOP caucus can of course decide they want to take a more adversarial line with the new Biden administration or they can seek to be more pragmatic and bi-partisan.
https://twitter.com/daveylittle/status/1325436023732625409?s=20
Not much of Marxism has survived to be of interest in today's world, in my opinion, but one important insight is that one should address structural problems structurally. It's no good making it possible to avoid paying taxes by pretending to live in the Virgin Islands and then launching a campaign against one individual or company who takes advantage of it. It's no good tolerating extremes of wealth differentials and then grumbling about one rich bloke. Either work to change the rules or shut up. One should (whether left, right, or mixed) decide what sort of society one wants to achieve and then aim to construct incentives and disncentives to steer people towards it - everything tartgeting individuals for behaving legally is a waste of time, and also essentially unfair.
Apart from Ken Clarke, Carolyn Flint and Stephen Lloyd there's not many Remain politicians who came out well between June 2016 and December 2019.
#EveryTorturerAndMurderersJobMatters
I have emailed you. Or at least, I think I have
MR
The charity you work for is the one I have supported for the longest period of my adult life. But your posts are pushing me toward the point where I’ll be writing to them explaining why my annual contributions are finished.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sQgrPZDPFQ
Edit. That's not to say that communism isn't a crap theory - it is. It's just inherently crap rather than inherently wicked.
https://www.fotmob.com/livescores/3411424?status=ongoing&h=1&a=0
Incidentally this is one area that the UK is light years ahead of the US on. Also most of Europe. Cashless life is a fact here*. They banned it in New York - because the shitty financial systems would mean that poor people would be unable to use shops...
*Literally used cash once since March.
Yet all of us should be eternally grateful that we live our lives freely able to type up here whatever random thoughts enter our minds, without worry as to the future safety or livelihoods of us and our families. It is a privilege, by accident of birth, that none of us should ever take for granted.
Honestly and frankly, Palmer’s glib disregard for the evil and wretched lives that communism has inflicted on so many millions of people during our lifetimes, disgusts me.
If I don’t see some sort of contrition from him here before tomorrow, I will be writing to CIWF (my membership of which dates back forty years) to express my disgust.
For context, what I'm thinking here it that the ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the Roman Republic isn't something that necessarily happens with republics, and that committed by the British is no indictment of constitutional monarchy. Great crimes do not necessarily mean they flow from that system of government as a matter of course, but I'm not sure about communism. I have other reasons for opposing it, so it's not a deciding question for me, but I've always been unsure about whether the charge really sticks.
NEW THREAD
https://shop.nationalarchives.gov.uk/collections/remembrance-jewellery?utm_source=emailmarketing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shop_remembrance_mailer&utm_content=2020-11-08
Just been sent an email by the National Archives in London highlighting merchandise. This the latest poppy stuff. The purple poppy puzzled me - but apparently in memoriam of horses and other beasts.
I travelled through Eastern Europe, behind the iron curtain, as a student. The current situation in Poland, eastern Germany, the Chech republic, is the greatest single political achievement I have seen during my lifetime.
If Palmer wants to argue to the contrary, then I am done with him and everything associated with him.
If he says “all vote should be counted” then he pisses off the person who is still president of the US until Jan 20, 2021 for no gain.
So why say anything? It’s a mischievous question despite Sophy Rodge’s po-faced denial
I am not a communist, but I think Nick sympathises more with Eurocommunism than Stalinism or Maoism.
They've got it badly wrong on Woke too but they aren't ready to admit it yet.
It will take electoral reality to do that over the next 10-15 years.
We are just ahead of our time.
The comment about Muslim women in full burkas looting like “letterboxes” was in an article defending their right to do so.
But people have chosen to focus on his perceived insult to Muslim people rather than his defence of their rights.
And yet they idolise Macron who had banned the things.
Funny old world isn’t it when what people say matters more than what they believe
And I don't want a curb on Dem radicalism. For me, Dem radicalism means addressing the ugly inequalities of American life that no 1st world country should tolerate.
But, yes, they will be boxed in by the overall result, I agree with you there. That's just a fact. So there will be a need to reach out and on that score my opinion of its desirability depends on what they are reaching out to. As examples. To a smaller tax rise than planned? Ok. To a compromise on business regulation? Ok. To a "let it rip" approach to the virus? Not Ok. To a tolerance for racist policing? Not Ok.
https://twitter.com/SamWangPhD/status/1325340524170113025?s=19
I think we could be looking at a split vote for the two seats.
Call me an old fashioned neon-fascist-capitalist-imperlialist-ensalver-of-the-oppressed, but a reasonable response to shortage of labour at price x could suggest that x is a bit on the low side...
We should be automating low paid jobs out of existence, not turning humans into low price automation. Progress, I think they call it.
Due to the comparative advantage of moving to low cost locations (China etc) being eroded by the disgusting behaviour of the workers*, simply dumping your manufacturing abroad is no longer automatically super profitable.
The socio-legal-political environment has a major effect on productivity. NHS, Schools, reliable legal system etc etc.
So while it is still cheaper per worker, the actual productivity per worker for skilled work is remarkably constant, around the world.
So how to cheat on this?
Well, if you employee people for x times more than they would have earned in their home country - sounds awesome. Since they don't speak the language, they won't know their rights. Yet. A year or 2 down the line, their is a risk they will learn some English and realise how shit the deal they are getting is.... But, hey, there are always more suckers.....
*Asking for a getting pay rises, working conditions that include actual health and safety etc.
But if it's the Rich World working class going rogue as the globalization double whammy hits - (i) reducing their privilege over the Poor World whilst (ii) increasing the gulf between them and the Rich World rich - then it is not so easy.
And of course it's the latter - not easy - scenario. Because if it were easy for the Left to square this circle it would have been done.
No. Of course not. The issue is the extent of measures to ensure that votes are legal. Where Trump went off the rails was suggesting that votes cast in accordance with legal procedures were automatically illegal - because they didn't vote for him.
This election - in the midst a Covid epidemic ripping through the US almost worse than anywhere else - was always going to be a problem for Trump. Not just because of his past record, but because the widespread use of postal votes to avoid long lines at polling stations allowed a free kick at Bishop Brennan's arse. People who might not have been bothered to go out into the plague pits to cast a vote were happy enough to vote from their armchairs.
There would have to have been a REALLY bad failure of polling to overcome this effect. It wasn't there in the early returns. Hence, I was comfortable in calling a Biden win here at 00.01 am on Wednesday.
A Cabinet minister could suprise people with some notable ministrerial work.Liz Truss with good trade deals for example.Or a Cabinet minister could catch the Tory members eye with a popular resignation.