Stive Pesley Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 27 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Just pointing out that you was factually incorrect when you said that one side is trying to make things fairer. you can't even quote me properly I said they were "trying a bit too hard to make society a fairer place" If you stop trying to be glib for a moment you might realise that I'm criticising them for that. But if you still think it's "factually incorrect" then feel free to offer a factually correct version Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 24 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said: OK, feel free to ignore my point about posting media links to news articles on "culture war" subject as being a bad idea, and keep posting stuff. I suppose it proves how deeply ingrained the "war" is on both sides. I post links to back up my argument. I'm not gonna spend a long time arguing my case on here, its a pointless cause at the best of times. Make a quick point, back it up with further reading if people can be bothered. Its a low effort reply on my behalf. 24 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said: Why does it matter how the "left" resolves the Islam/LGBT issues? The "left" aren't in power, it doesn't matter what they think any more than it matters what you think on the "right". As you argued on an earlier point - the law is the law, leave it at that. What the two sides on the "culture war" think doesn't actually make any difference. Because the left seem to focus more on group identity rather and their position in the heirarchy than the right and these groups are increasingly coming into conflict with each other. Islam/LGBT, feminism/trans rights etc and its splintering the left both here and in the US. We could easily face a situation whereby both Labour and the Democrats split into two parties in the near future as the center left and far left are becoming ever more distant - as you syourself found out yesterday. Regardless of whether they are currently in power or not unless the left can resolve the issues it faces its setting us up for a generation of Tories/Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 42 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said: I don't think giving more examples of the patriarchal societies assumed gender roles is quite the burn you think it is! It's not supposed to be a burn, and if course it wont be when you point me in the direction if the people trying to make society fairer by campaigning to even up the percentages in these sort of jobs, I await the links. 37 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said: you can't even quote me properly I said they were "trying a bit too hard to make society a fairer place" If you stop trying to be glib for a moment you might realise that I'm criticising them for that. But if you still think it's "factually incorrect" then feel free to offer a factually correct version Your criticism is that they are trying too hard, I think it is factually incorrect that they are trying to make society a fairer place full stop. Trying to make it fair would take into account all people... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 22 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Your criticism is that they are trying too hard, I think it is factually incorrect that they are trying to make society a fairer place full stop. How you can say that it's factually incorrect that this is what they are trying to do? It can be your opinion that they aren't succeeding (and in some cases I'd definitely agree with you), but I'm pretty sure they genuinely believe that they are trying to make society fairer. Or is your "factually incorrect" argument suggesting that they aren't trying to do that and they have some other nefarious agenda and it's all a front? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 The fact that we are debating stuff that no one actually talks or cares about in shops and factories, shows that the media has divided us on spurious grounds to stop us talking about ever growing class sizes, creeping privatisation of the NHS, savage cuts in social and elderly care, the gradual decline from a civilised, caring society to a dog eat dog, race to the bottom state the right will take us to if unchecked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 5 minutes ago, uttoxram75 said: The fact that we are debating stuff that no one actually talks or cares about in shops and factories, shows that the media has divided us on spurious grounds to stop us talking about ever growing class sizes, creeping privatisation of the NHS, savage cuts in social and elderly care, the gradual decline from a civilised, caring society to a dog eat dog, race to the bottom state the right will take us to if unchecked. Dunna worry youth - getting Brexit done will sort all that.....apparently Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 45 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said: How you can say that it's factually incorrect that this is what they are trying to do? It can be your opinion that they aren't succeeding (and in some cases I'd definitely agree with you), but I'm pretty sure they genuinely believe that they are trying to make society fairer. Or is your "factually incorrect" argument suggesting that they aren't trying to do that and they have some other nefarious agenda and it's all a front? Because as I stated, trying to create a fairer society should take everyone into consideration. Saying we need a female party leader or a black actor or more gay footballers is not taking everyone into consideration, it is promoting people based on their gender, race or sexual orientation. If you think that is fair, then that is fine as it is your opinion. Unfortunately though, you can not tell other people what to think. And from my point of view, it is making the situation worse and turning more people against these supposed suppressed minorities that you are trying to promote. Once again that is only my opinion and one that you are completely free to challenge. Like I say though, if we are after a completely fair society, it's not just the top jobs that we should be pushing for more minorities to be represented in, it should be every job across the spectrum where they are not proportionally represented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 You haven't really understood what I wrote have you? Not even sure you understand your own answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1of4 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 I see Johnson as finally found the time to give an interview with the BBC. Who did the Beeb choose to conduct this first interview with the newly elected Prime Minister? Did they give the job to one of their regular political reporters, such as Andrew Neil, Andrew Marr, or maybe Laura Kuenssberg. No they rolled out that heavy weight of political interviewers , the one and only Dan Walker. It appears that the BBC's management are taking seriously, Johnson's threat to scrap the licence fee. So when do we officially start calling the BBC, the Boris Broadcasting Corporation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteHorseRam Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 16 hours ago, 1of4 said: Thought you had the same leaning as this guy. Any pork in a storm …. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 1 hour ago, SchtivePesley said: You haven't really understood what I wrote have you? Not even sure you understand your own answer Ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 4 hours ago, uttoxram75 said: The fact that we are debating stuff that no one actually talks or cares about in shops and factories, shows that the media has divided us on spurious grounds to stop us talking about ever growing class sizes, creeping privatisation of the NHS, savage cuts in social and elderly care, the gradual decline from a civilised, caring society to a dog eat dog, race to the bottom state the right will take us to if unchecked. I don't think you should conclude that the usual suspects arguing on here about stuff means that the rest of us don't care about those things you mention. As someone with whom I rarely agree with politically but genuinely respect, where do you stand on the Labour leadership contest?. Centrist vs Corbyn follower? Is it better to go centre/left, water down the policies and have a better chance of winning power, or stick to the Momentum/Corbyn radical (and so far, failed) agenda?. IMO we really need a strong and credible opposition and for that to happen, Labour need someone moderate in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van der MoodHoover Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 3 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said: I don't think you should conclude that the usual suspects arguing on here about stuff means that the rest of us don't care about those things you mention. As someone with whom I rarely agree with politically but genuinely respect, where do you stand on the Labour leadership contest?. Centrist vs Corbyn follower? Is it better to go centre/left, water down the policies and have a better chance of winning power, or stick to the Momentum/Corbyn radical (and so far, failed) agenda?. IMO we really need a strong and credible opposition and for that to happen, Labour need someone moderate in charge. Labour only wins when they're more central....Blair, Wilson winners. Even Brown wasn't a million miles off and lost to a resurgent centre; Corbyn, Foot on the other hand were hopeless; Kinnock spent all his time trying to rebuild but paved the way for Smith and ultimately Blair. The paradox is that a more central labour won't look a lot different to a lot of what Boris is promoting - at least economically. So the act of "opposition" temporarily loses force until such time as things start to go wrong for the Tories. Maybe their social care bill might be the catalyst for some clear policy differentiation between the two, if anything like reality starts to dawn...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 8 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said: I don't think you should conclude that the usual suspects arguing on here about stuff means that the rest of us don't care about those things you mention. As someone with whom I rarely agree with politically but genuinely respect, where do you stand on the Labour leadership contest?. Centrist vs Corbyn follower? Is it better to go centre/left, water down the policies and have a better chance of winning power, or stick to the Momentum/Corbyn radical (and so far, failed) agenda?. IMO we really need a strong and credible opposition and for that to happen, Labour need someone moderate in charge. I know you're not asking me, but I tend to agree (as I think I said in my post yesterday). Although paradoxically I don't think Labour would have won the December election with a "moderate" leader either - so pervasive was the malin shadow of Brexit hanging over everything. I don't think anyone could have won the last election for Labour. Now Brexit is a given - a Labour moderate should be able to clean up (assuming it goes badly...which it may not of course) at the next election Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 32 minutes ago, Van Wolfie said: I don't think you should conclude that the usual suspects arguing on here about stuff means that the rest of us don't care about those things you mention. As someone with whom I rarely agree with politically but genuinely respect, where do you stand on the Labour leadership contest?. Centrist vs Corbyn follower? Is it better to go centre/left, water down the policies and have a better chance of winning power, or stick to the Momentum/Corbyn radical (and so far, failed) agenda?. IMO we really need a strong and credible opposition and for that to happen, Labour need someone moderate in charge. In my opinion, Labour should red line vital public services, no matter who the leader is, the party should make their case, financially and morally, that Education, Health, Energy, Water, Justice, Transport and Defence be run for the good of the country and not just for private profit. No body should even be in the Labour Party, let alone leading it, if they don’t share that core vision of running quality public services for the benefit of everyone living here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jono Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 On 13/01/2020 at 15:40, SchtivePesley said: Christ on a bike – it’s carnage on Labour twitter. I’m unfollowing people at a rate of knots and feel like I’m escaping a cult! It’s no secret that I supported Corbyn, but it’s like people have learned nothing from the last 4 years. Good policies count for nothing if you can’t articulate the message in a balanced way, and the mainstream media will destroy you if you try and appear radical. Starmer is the only obvious choice. Much as I’d like to see a female leader, I just think none of them have the charisma to pull it off. Meanwhile Labour twitter is going mad about Starmer not being radical enough and questioning every element of his left wing credentials. God this is depressing But it’s not about articulation. I think Corbyn and Macdonell articulated their policies and ideals very well. I suspect it’s that the majority of the public didn’t think they were workable and that far left politics has been proven not to be effective anywhere in the long term. Or particularly popular in the UK across time. Starmer is certainly left of Blair but could have more appeal to the public at large. I am not so sure he will appeal to the large number of new members, registered supporters and momentum. it’s going to be an interesting contest. Of all of them I like Jess Phillips as a character. She is pretty rare in that she answers questions and is a bit of an anti sound bite politician which regardless of your politics has to be an admirable trait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jono Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, uttoxram75 said: In my opinion, Labour should red line vital public services, no matter who the leader is, the party should make their case, financially and morally, that Education, Health, Energy, Water, Justice, Transport and Defence be run for the good of the country and not just for private profit. No body should even be in the Labour Party, let alone leading it, if they don’t share that core vision of running quality public services for the benefit of everyone living here. I think that is fair enough, but I still want to challenge this “profit” thing like it’s an evil entity .. the assumption that a cut disappears to the Bahamas. It doesn’t .. it gets paid as dividends to shareholders .. who are primarily investment funds that get money to buy the shares from folk paying in to pensions. The profit gets paid out as pensions for millions of ordinary people. .. I think in these utilities / essential services / near monopolies there is a strong argument for capping executive pay and for having a regulator with teeth but profit per se really tends to mean well run and efficient. The state via nationalisation is usually worse at this but I’d acknowledge perhaps it might be better at long term planning. .. hence in a private sector op you need a well founded regulatory structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadbob Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 10 hours ago, maxjam said: Well feel free to ignore the political links I posted and just focus on the film despite the fact I have repeatedly said the culture war infects everything from the sublime to the ridiculous. The Joker was just another example of how disconnected the media are from the average person, it wasn't so much the bad ratings it got as to why it was getting those bad reviews. Not sure if your last couple of sentences were serious or not, given an earlier post I think the former in which case lets just say that you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine and leave it there, I think continuing this discussion further would be a massive waste of both of our time. Why was the film getting bad reviews? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjam Posted January 14, 2020 Share Posted January 14, 2020 56 minutes ago, bigbadbob said: Why was the film getting bad reviews? Because it was a film about an angry white male, the media classes were screaming from behind their keyboards that white men can't possibly be victims, it would spark incel violence and other such inane ramblings. The Guardian gave it 2/5 stars review in the days before it came out. Then when it actually started getting good reviews from a sane audience that didn't have a clue what the fuss was about published a second review and gave it 4/5 stars. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 14, 2020 Author Share Posted January 14, 2020 2 hours ago, uttoxram75 said: In my opinion, Labour should red line vital public services, no matter who the leader is, the party should make their case, financially and morally, that Education, Health, Energy, Water, Justice, Transport and Defence be run for the good of the country and not just for private profit. No body should even be in the Labour Party, let alone leading it, if they don’t share that core vision of running quality public services for the benefit of everyone living here. All well and good in theory but does it work in practice? And where is the money coming from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.