The Politics Thread 2020

[WhiteHorseRam]

35 minutes ago, Highgate said:

I acknowledge that Churchill carried out some dark deeds. But on balance as Dr Mengele didn't get to Bengal, Iraq or Kenya I think he gets to stay in the 'good guy' column.  As evil as the Third Reich was, was it ever their intention to invade these countries ?  Was it ever Churchill's intention to save countries like these from Hitler ?

I think its pretty clear Nazi Germany wanted everything.

No Winston - no Allied win. As much as we talk it up, it also suits post 1945 USA and Russia to play down our contribution.

Obviously there are many crucial aspects to the Allied victory, Churchill being one of them, without doubt.  But even more important is Russia's role, just look at the numbers involved.  In fact had Germany not decided to switch their attentions from Britain to Russia, then Britain would have fallen like France before it despite Churchill's best efforts.  After the US joined the war in 1941, even if Britain had stood aside at that moment, do you really think Germany could have won? 

No Winston - no combined historical Allied effort.

The UK was a fortress from early 1941. Brooke, a very underrated general had a good plan to defend it and the RAF was growing exponentially. It was effectively a stalemate.

If we had done a deal in 1940, there would have been no continuity of struggle - the Reich would have rested all their forces and attacked Russia earlier. Without the diversion of the British Empire they could have committed all their forces. It was very touch and go for the Soviets in 1941. Talking numbers - without the massive USA/British aid funneled through the Arctic Sea and Persian routes - moved by the British Empire - the Russians couldn't have concentrated on tank and field gun production. They received something like 400,000 jeeps for example.

Talking numbers - The massive Allied victory in Tunisia in early 1943 eliminated almost as many Axis troops as Stalingrad did. The US army had its learner driver plates on and much of the winning was done by British Empire troops (Indian, Australia, NZ, S. African). 

Talking numbers - the Royal Navy protected the huge US troop convoys that crossed the Atlantic - Operation BOLERO

Churchill did a great deal to woo the USA into joining the war - as it was Hitler saved him a lot of effort by declaring war on the USA himself.

Why would we have stood aside when the USA joined the war in 1941? The USA also made enormous use of our bases and knowledge of fighting the Germans.

We also diverted a massive Japanese effort when the USA was in deep trouble in 1942.

 

But context is all.

Lets view him alongside his contemporaries - Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, Franco, Petain, Stalin, Chiang kai-shek, Quisling .... even the lovely Swedes sold the Nazis the iron they needed for their shells and tanks.  

I think you are guilty of cherry picking some of the worst people in history there for the sake of a comparison.  Nobody is going to argue that there weren't far worse people than Churchill around, nor that he didn't have admirable aspects to his character. 

I struggled to think of any 'nice' contemporaries he might have had. They are his contemporaries. How about De Valera?

If there had been no British Empire ....

There would have been bigger French/German/Spanish/Portuguese Empires. It was the age of imperialism. Even the Americans got a cheeky little one in at then end.

With respect I don't think that's much of a defence.  Merely stating that other country with pillaging weaker nations too is hardly an excuse.  Nobody need feel guilty for the sins of their ancestors, but the crimes should still be acknowledged and understood as such and the reputation of those who were instrumental to such a history should be adjusted accordingly. As should the legacy of imperialism in countries that suffered from it.  There is nothing cheeky about castrating Kenyan prisoners of war as late as the 1950s. 

I think that is a very relevant defence. It was the age of empires. You have to view people in context. It was smash and grab - if we hadn't had Kenya someone else would have done. No, it wasn't I right - it was just reality.

Also, a British bloke didn't just sit up in bed in 1550, and thought up slavery. It's been around forever. It was probably trying to sleep on numerous filthy mattresses in earshot of the protesters at the weekend.

Yeah, that's true, it's been going on since forever as you say. If people are looking people to erect statues in honour off...then how about the British politician William Wilberforce, who led the movement to abolish the slave trade in the British Empire.

Wilberforce has one in Hull. Hold on, are you telling me the British Empire abolished slavery? 

As I have said before here the Past is a dark place - don't view stuff in isolation and apply some balance. Context is all. We must analyse both sides of the argument regarding these figures, so as per my previous post, lets stick with Prof Palmer and have some good interpretation.

I agree, I guess the problem is always there are many different interpretations, and who decides which one is good?

Thats where highly paid commentators, academics etc come in. Then let people decide for themselves

 

[ariotofmyown]

1 hour ago, Archied said:

Your silence is violence then

Erm, I said that whilst I haven't done much in terms of direct action, I haven't been silent. Your attempt to presumably criticise either that slogan or myself would have made sense if my response to the original question was "I just keep my head down and say nothing guvnor".

[alexxxxx]

Farage has left LBC with immediate effect. Ha! Soon to be irrelevant. 

[1967Ram]

16 hours ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

Oven ready. We just need to get an oven.

Boris can't find the oven-ready deal in the fridge

[Eddie]

19 minutes ago, WhiteHorseRam said:

I agree, I guess the problem is always there are many different interpretations, and who decides which one is good?

The winners. You can justify many things by winning - especially if you control the narrative.

[WhiteHorseRam]

1 minute ago, Eddie said:

The winners. You can justify many things by winning - especially if you control the narrative.

No, that was @Highgate  ?

Yes winning helps. Dead men can't write.

[Alph]

41 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

I see it slightly differently, I heard a Bristol university lecturer on the radio say something along the lines of ‘we’ve been discussing the statue for 31 years and the protests on Sunday did more to move that discussion on than anything else preceding it’. Point is to me we are good at discussing and having opinions but not very good at listening. If we were better at that we me might be further down the line on this. Let’s even take a look at this thread, we are all brilliant at having an opinion and discussing it but are we getting anywhere?

I'm not sure the protest moved discussion on. It just removed the topic! 

We could do more instead of talk more. 

If they have been talking about that statue for 31 years then surely someone thought up a vote? Or vote whether to add context to it or move it? 

I think we've got somewhere in this thread. Maybe you don't see much acknowledgement of being wrong but there are surely points made against us all that make us think twice or backtrack? 

Can only speak for myself but I thought if you lived in Britain and were actually offended by British pride or history on display then that's your problem. Move. 

Given the discussion today I think I've learned it's not that British history is offensive, it's that it's selective. 

So now I'm thinking how could we build monuments to include the modern Britain? To pull previously hushed parts of our history and use it to inspire the modern face of Britain. (Without damaging anything that represents the white people, the English, The Scots etc)

That's just bloody statues though. I don't think my excitement over statues will go far towards equality. 

I'm tired of the arguments when it comes to law, employment and policing. It's more complex, it hurts my brain and there are far more fiery people about that than history. More complex problems and solutions. As soon as someone says White Privilege I can't help but be offended. Trying to explain what it is they're getting didn't sink in for a long time. Now I at least get their point about white male dominance and hopefully somebody got my point about the phrase being offensive. But from then on it's like minefield. Finger pointing everywhere. 

All good though without insults. Can agree to disagree etc. 

Be good to know how many people have left this thread with a slightly adjusted opinion. I reckon most. 

We spend most our time in here arguing about the problems and come up with very few solutions. We should be in charge of the country based on that, no?

[Alph]

Might not be everyone's cup of tea but my favourite comedian and favourite anti racist racist. 

 

 

 

 

[TuffLuff]

32 minutes ago, Alpha said:

I'm not sure the protest moved discussion on. It just removed the topic! 

We could do more instead of talk more. 

If they have been talking about that statue for 31 years then surely someone thought up a vote? Or vote whether to add context to it or move it? 

I think we've got somewhere in this thread. Maybe you don't see much acknowledgement of being wrong but there are surely points made against us all that make us think twice or backtrack? 

Can only speak for myself but I thought if you lived in Britain and were actually offended by British pride or history on display then that's your problem. Move. 

Given the discussion today I think I've learned it's not that British history is offensive, it's that it's selective. 

So now I'm thinking how could we build monuments to include the modern Britain? To pull previously hushed parts of our history and use it to inspire the modern face of Britain. (Without damaging anything that represents the white people, the English, The Scots etc)

That's just bloody statues though. I don't think my excitement over statues will go far towards equality. 

I'm tired of the arguments when it comes to law, employment and policing. It's more complex, it hurts my brain and there are far more fiery people about that than history. More complex problems and solutions. As soon as someone says White Privilege I can't help but be offended. Trying to explain what it is they're getting didn't sink in for a long time. Now I at least get their point about white male dominance and hopefully somebody got my point about the phrase being offensive. But from then on it's like minefield. Finger pointing everywhere. 

All good though without insults. Can agree to disagree etc. 

Be good to know how many people have left this thread with a slightly adjusted opinion. I reckon most. 

We spend most our time in here arguing about the problems and come up with very few solutions. We should be in charge of the country based on that, no?

I think the impact of the protests won’t be realised until 6 months, a year or even two years down the line. At the very least once all the furore of it dies down.

My understanding is that it was due to removed or replaced anyway? That it was likely to be moved to Liverpool rather than a Bristol museum or something like that, so there was discussions (ha!) ongoing with that. (It’s maybe one for another day but this could be seen as another issue with the centralisation and defunding of councils in the last ten years but maybe that’s best left for another day cause I don’t have the info to say whether that’s necessarily true or even my stance)

Ofcourse and I hope people maybe away from the keyboard do think twice. As @ariotofmyown said some weeks ago, this thread is fascinating and I genuinely use it in real life because it gives you a wide variety of opinions.

*im gonna move onto a new post as I accidentally posted this one and I’m scared I’ll run out of time before my editing time finishes!*

[B4ev6is]

Like old pubs signs with black man on it all of sudden it is  racist been there for hundreds of years.

Yet these so called people destroying statues and throwing things in the river.

If football fans be labled hoglions or up to no good.

People gatherings in there thousands no socail distancing.

But yet football fans being punished who cant go own freaking stadiums.

 

[TuffLuff]

1 hour ago, Alpha said:

I'm not sure the protest moved discussion on. It just removed the topic! 

We could do more instead of talk more. 

If they have been talking about that statue for 31 years then surely someone thought up a vote? Or vote whether to add context to it or move it? 

I think we've got somewhere in this thread. Maybe you don't see much acknowledgement of being wrong but there are surely points made against us all that make us think twice or backtrack? 

Can only speak for myself but I thought if you lived in Britain and were actually offended by British pride or history on display then that's your problem. Move. 

Given the discussion today I think I've learned it's not that British history is offensive, it's that it's selective. 

So now I'm thinking how could we build monuments to include the modern Britain? To pull previously hushed parts of our history and use it to inspire the modern face of Britain. (Without damaging anything that represents the white people, the English, The Scots etc)

That's just bloody statues though. I don't think my excitement over statues will go far towards equality. 

I'm tired of the arguments when it comes to law, employment and policing. It's more complex, it hurts my brain and there are far more fiery people about that than history. More complex problems and solutions. As soon as someone says White Privilege I can't help but be offended. Trying to explain what it is they're getting didn't sink in for a long time. Now I at least get their point about white male dominance and hopefully somebody got my point about the phrase being offensive. But from then on it's like minefield. Finger pointing everywhere. 

All good though without insults. Can agree to disagree etc. 

Be good to know how many people have left this thread with a slightly adjusted opinion. I reckon most. 

We spend most our time in here arguing about the problems and come up with very few solutions. We should be in charge of the country based on that, no?

Continued!

My issues in here come when I see the goalposts being moved on a topic to suit a posters agenda (for example some weeks ago when a meme was posted to try and move the Cummings debate onto labour MPs) or when a statement is made with nothing to back it up (the ‘racism isn’t as bad as in the 70s stuff) from the other day. I think we have to be careful of what sources/data we are using. I’m fully aware that I’ve seen misinformation on this thread that’s allowed to sit there which to me is just as bad as the insults. Opinion is all well and good, but I kinda hope we come on here to learn and discuss rather than just shout repeatedly over each other useless information. 

The selective comment is spot on. There’s a big ol’ debate happening now about how the curriculum should be changed to discuss British atrocities and understand our past more. In principal that is correct, but I’d actually argue that teachers could do that in the curriculum they have now and that they could do more. My secondary school teachers did because they considered it a moral responsibility. A bit more taking on responsibility than pointing fingers is what’s needed and I think that’s a general argument that can be made in the debate on racism, we should look to take more responsibility than expect it from others.

I had the conversation in real life about the phrase ‘check your privilege’ and how unhelpful it was because you couldn’t help feeling uppity when someone said it. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t understand our privilege, I think when (or sadly, if) that happens then it will be a good thing but we are some way off that then.

Re: statues, I’d say you can have something that makes you think about slavery. Let’s maybe not let that be a white man made rich from it. It kinda defeats the point.

As I said I fully love the debate, hopefully insults are a spur of the moment thing. Mine was earlier as I thought the poster was being patronising and deserved a bit back. Soon regretted it, I think most on here are ok really. One thing I fully appreciate is that it must be a nightmare to mod!

I think even if we don’t adjust our own opinions we should try and see the other side of the argument that’s expressed, I genuinely think that helps construct debate. Did I already say that?

Christ sorry @Alpha that’s long and rambly. I’ll make no comment on the being in charge part. Whilst @MaxC and @SchtivePesleyare arguing across the despatch box I think I’ll swerve it and have a beer in the commons bar!

 

Oh and Chowdery is brilliant!

[Archied]

1 hour ago, ariotofmyown said:

Erm, I said that whilst I haven't done much in terms of direct action, I haven't been silent. Your attempt to presumably criticise either that slogan or myself would have made sense if my response to the original question was "I just keep my head down and say nothing guvnor".

Not Silent ? Does that mean posting on forums where it’s safe and nobody knows anybody from Adam? Yes I have a problem with the slogan and easy hero’s ( only you will know if that’s fits yourself with honest look) 

why wouldn’t any decent person have a problem with some of the stuff being bandied about , being white skinned means you must be racist , not actively fighting racism means your racist , being a decent not racist human being is not enough and your racist , being non white means you can’t be racist or behave in a racist way 

here’s a thing ,, not everybody has the strength of character to actively fight racism no matter the colour of they’re skin nor the physical strength or the security of position ,, that does not make them racist 

I personaly don’t give a stuff about statues ( some do whether wanting them down or kept) people in the main don’t hold up to 100% scrutiny by everybody s standards ,

 

[GboroRam]

3 minutes ago, Archied said:

 not actively fighting racism means your racist , being a decent not racist human being is not enough and your racist

Won't pull apart the rest of what you say, but I'm sure someone will comment. I think it is more like the old, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. 

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”― Edmund Burke

[djfred84]

Wish we took more of a positive stance on black history month instead of the usual jibes used maybe got everyone more involved especially the main tv stations.

[Sith Happens]

6 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Won't pull apart the rest of what you say, but I'm sure someone will comment. I think it is more like the old, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. 

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”― Edmund Burke

if you treat people the right way, don't discriminate,  treat all genders,  and people regardless of the colour of their skin as equal, surely you are part of the solution. It's very easy to be seen to be doing the right thing publicly, especially those who are in the public eye, but for me there is more value in doing the right thing when no one will notice than shouting from the rooftops about the things we should be doing, just for public acclaim. 

[TuffLuff]

27 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

if you treat people the right way, don't discriminate,  treat all genders,  and people regardless of the colour of their skin as equal, surely you are part of the solution. It's very easy to be seen to be doing the right thing publicly, especially those who are in the public eye, but for me there is more value in doing the right thing when no one will notice than shouting from the rooftops about the things we should be doing, just for public acclaim. 

Fully agree with you on this in principle but who’s the judge on all of it? Yourself or those you don’t want to discrimate against? Point is I genuinely believe the vast majority don’t want to be racist, sexist, judgemental but we don’t know that we do it. We can always learn how to improve and be open to improvement.

[1967RAMS]

51 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:

Like old pubs signs with black man on it all of sudden it is  racist been there for hundreds of years.

Yet these so called people destroying statues and throwing things in the river.

If football fans be labled hoglions or up to no good.

People gatherings in there thousands no socail distancing.

But yet football fans being punished who cant go own freaking stadiums.

 

I’m sorry to say b4 but the current argument FOR the protests may be going over your head. Don’t worry about it though, the arguments AGAINST protests, are also going over the head of most of the protesters. Knee jerk reactions rarely prove to be good decisions. Both sides should take time. Reflect and put forward positive solutions. I am very biased but myself and both my sons are scholars of history. Most consider it a easy or worthless study. But the only way to learn from one’s mistakes, personally or as a nation or even on a global stage. Is to evaluate your mistakes and endeavour to correct them. In my very humble opinion, leave the statues in situ but put a plaque or statue of equal prominence next to it. This should  depict a person of different colour, race or creed. Or people with a different sexual identity or preference who despite being ignored, deserve to be heard. If white, black or children of any colour, don’t have the ability to see our past atrocities. Just, maybe one of them will make the same mistake 

[Sith Happens]

22 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

Fully agree with you on this in principle but who’s the judge on all of it? Yourself or those you don’t want to discrimate against? Point is I genuinely believe the vast majority don’t want to be racist, sexist, judgemental but we don’t know that we do it. We can always learn how to improve and be open to improvement.

I'm sure we can. For me though there are too many celebrities,  politicians etc making the right noise but are they doing it for the right reasons or for public perception 

[Archied]

49 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Won't pull apart the rest of what you say, but I'm sure someone will comment. I think it is more like the old, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. 

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”― Edmund Burke

That’s a very easy throw away comment , who decides what constitutes being part of the solution? Who decides what is doing nothing ? 
people are very diverse, have they’re own strengths and weakness , do what they are able in their own way ,

I have no time for racists and beyond deploring them I actually feel quite sad for them , that’s not living ,evolving ,there’s no peace of mind there 

I have no problem with the young carrying on the fight to eradicate racism but they need to remember that pulling down statues ,throwing bikes and missiles is much much easier in today’s climate and surrounded by the safety of the majority than it was for decent people behaving with decency for years ,

I saw the post saying you can’t say racism has got better since the sixties/ seventies , well that’s just not true , call out racism today you are rightly supported by the majority, go back 30 years and it took far far more balls so perhaps people need to engage they’re brains before they blithely put people in boxes 

[Archied]

36 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

Fully agree with you on this in principle but who’s the judge on all of it? Yourself or those you don’t want to discrimate against? Point is I genuinely believe the vast majority don’t want to be racist, sexist, judgemental but we don’t know that we do it. We can always learn how to improve and be open to improvement.

Yep you are right we can and should always be able to learn , who’s to judge ? The mirror ,