|
Trickjaw posted:I wonder if he is on Ahab's side. Moby Dick is the NHS
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
Party Boat posted:I was hoping they'd given him one of the dusty as gently caress chapters where nothing happens but you get a lecture on the technical aspects of whaling. Turns out he's got one of the shortest chapters of the book where Ahab smokes a pipe, then doesn't smoke a pipe. Tony Benn.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:Moby Dick is the NHS It'll drag him down to the briny depths never to be seen again? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
I'm not sure David Cameron's heart would do very much damage to macroscopic life even if you fired it out of a very large cannon. Save possibly to mutually annihilate with the first air molecule it made contact with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
A dead pig smoked David Cameron's pipe
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:Ugh This was four years ago, BK. So presumably the recording is already out there somewhere, if anyone wants to listen to it. Why would you want to listen to it, tho
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
https://soundcloud.com/moby-dick-big-read/chapter-30-the-pipe-read-by
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Barry Foster posted:This was four years ago, BK. It's here http://www.mobydickbigread.com/chapter-30-the-pipe/
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Totally wrong accent regardless of opinions of Cameron. Needs more West Country.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Barry Foster posted:This was four years ago, BK. Yeah that one passed me by though, although I'm not sure how I missed it!!! That sounds exactly how I expected
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Oh look, some good news thanks to the Lords againquote:Tory bid to scrap income-related child poverty measures defeated in Lords by majority of 92 And another day, another Danczuk quote:Rochdale Simon Danczuk has been reported to both the police and the parliamentary standards commissioner over thousands of pounds worth of ‘fraudulent’ expenses claims. quote:Mr Danczuk admits he did not check the rules carefully and has said he would pay back anything he is found to owe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Replace our entire state apparatus with unelected gerontocrats imo because theyre loving killing it lately.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
When are they scheduled to kick him out of the party officially?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:And another day, another Danczuk The fact that those expenses have only just now come to light means the Labour party is clearly loving done with the guy. quote:Perhaps Ipsa’s rules are too vaguely worded and not flexible enough to cope with modern families like mine. Danczuk is proof that cartoonishly evil bad guys are not actually unrealistic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:
Especially ironic when according to his ex wife he has been dodging the CSA and refuses to help with his sons accomodation costs at uni.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
Fans posted:Danczuk is proof that cartoonishly evil bad guys are not actually unrealistic. I think you are crediting him with more intelligence than gross arrogance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Trickjaw posted:I think you are crediting him with more intelligence than gross arrogance. I think you need to be smart to be this stupid. Meanwhile who want some good old fashioned political lies? http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jan/24/george-osborne-meetings-media-rupert-murdoch-telegraph quote:Treasury records show that Osborne held two ministerial meetings with Murdoch in June 2015 and then another in September that year. Osborne met with Murdoch and the BBC director, but they didn't discuss anything important enough to write down and you know that because they didn't write anything down. Except that one time they did write something down, which the public isn't allowed to see because it'd give them ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Replace our entire state apparatus with unelected gerontocrats imo because theyre loving killing it lately. Honestly, at this stage if the Lords had any actual policymaking power as opposed to just veto power, they would have held a constitutional convention and enacted PR by now. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
hookerbot 5000 posted:Especially ironic when according to his ex wife he has been dodging the CSA and refuses to help with his sons accomodation costs at uni. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Does anyone have a quick and easy rebuttal to people who pull the whole 'well everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you have to respect that because there is no right answer' thing? My mother is the worst for this, which I guess is preferable to being an out and out tory. It's frustrating because the only real response is 'no, they're wrong' which always ends with her eye rolling. I just hate how common the idea that we all have to tolerate toxic beliefs for the sake of politeness is.
ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Jan 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
Dabir posted:gently caress me Enda Kenny can talk for a long time without saying anything. It is a skill every Irish political leader learns. Wouldn't want to do something hasty like give an opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
Although any of the chapters about multiculturalism would have been good, it's a real tragedy that he wasn't given chapter 95 to read.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Does anyone have a quick and easy rebuttal to people who pull the whole 'well everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you have to respect that because there is no right answer' thing? My mother is the worst for this, which I guess is preferable to being an out and out tory. It's frustrating because the only real response is 'no, they're wrong' which always ends with her eye rolling. I just hate how common the idea that we all have to tolerate toxic beliefs for the sake of politeness is. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-2/mswv2_03.htm
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
Serotonin posted:https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-2/mswv2_03.htm Tell me about it pal
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Does anyone have a quick and easy rebuttal to people who pull the whole 'well everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you have to respect that because there is no right answer' thing? My mother is the worst for this, which I guess is preferable to being an out and out tory. It's frustrating because the only real response is 'no, they're wrong' which always ends with her eye rolling. I just hate how common the idea that we all have to tolerate toxic beliefs for the sake of politeness is. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but you certainly don't have to respect those opinions. If somebody is misinformed or has an interest that would bias their opinion (basically everyone) or is just plain stupid their opinion might well be wrong! Also, even if there is no definitively right answer, some answers are definitely more wrong than others. If you ask me what 2+2 is and I say "about 5" that's not entirely accurate, but it's not nearly as wrong as someone who says -300.17. In short, no I don't know a good rebuttal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Does anyone have a quick and easy rebuttal to people who pull the whole 'well everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you have to respect that because there is no right answer' thing? My mother is the worst for this, which I guess is preferable to being an out and out tory. It's frustrating because the only real response is 'no, they're wrong' which always ends with her eye rolling. I just hate how common the idea that we all have to tolerate toxic beliefs for the sake of politeness is. You have the right to express your opinion, but you have no right to have anyone agree with that opinion, nor are you guaranteed an audience. You also don't really have the right to have anyone like you as a person as a result of or in spite of your opinions. So you can have any opinion you want but nobody has to listen to it or you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:It is a skill every Irish political leader learns. Wouldn't want to do something hasty like give an opinion. Also to be fair to Enda he must be shiteing it at the moment considering he could be about to be beaten by Sinn loving Fein in an election in a few months.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Does anyone have a quick and easy rebuttal to people who pull the whole 'well everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you have to respect that because there is no right answer' thing? My mother is the worst for this, which I guess is preferable to being an out and out tory. It's frustrating because the only real response is 'no, they're wrong' which always ends with her eye rolling. I just hate how common the idea that we all have to tolerate toxic beliefs for the sake of politeness is. Act very childishly and any time she tries to tell you something just quote that back to her.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Does anyone have a quick and easy rebuttal to people who pull the whole 'well everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you have to respect that because there is no right answer' thing? That's their way of telling you they don't actually want to talk about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Fans posted:That's their way of telling you they don't actually want to talk about it. Yes but they're wronngggggg. You can't just leave that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
I've tried both of these but with certain people there seems to be this belief that in the absence of absolute objective scientific truth all opinions are equally valid. I know this is wrong, and I have repeatedly said 'no, free speech doesn't obligate respect for that speech', but some people just do not get this. I also find that they are the kind of people unwilling to listen to the relatively complex arguments as to why something is right/wrong that would be necessary to persuade them. This is their fault, not mine, but it's no less frustrating. This goes double for people who have their hearts in the right place and are fundamentally decent but just aren't overly political - the kind of people who when pressed can't really formulate WHY they think something is right or wrong, but clearly just run off a gut feeling that it is is or isn't. You can't just alienate them by calling them stupid and refusing to engage, but neither can you engage them in enough depth to realise the absurdity of their position. I'm entirely fine with calling a politically active right winger a moron and moving on, but when you're dealing with people who consider themselves non-political it's much more difficult. Most of them seem to have liberal definitions so deeply ingrained into their consciousness that it would be incredibly difficult to shake them. I suppose the best you can do is just keep hammering the message politely.Fans posted:That's their way of telling you they don't actually want to talk about it. Not always. This has very often been a point they volunteered after hearing me talking with something else/me making a throwaway comment that wasn't ever going to become a full discussion. Sometimes probably though, to be fair. ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Jan 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
"How do you feel about people who think the only reason you should be allowed to live is because they can make money off your work?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I've tried both of these but with certain people there seems to be this belief that in the absence of absolute objective scientific truth all opinions are equally valid. I know this is wrong, and I have repeatedly said 'no, free speech doesn't obligate respect for that speech', but some people just do not get this. I also find that they are the kind of people unwilling to listen to the relatively complex arguments as to why something is right/wrong that would be necessary to persuade them. This is their fault, not mine, but it's no less frustrating. This goes double for people who have their hearts in the right place and are fundamentally decent but just aren't overly political - the kind of people who when pressed can't really formulate WHY they think something is right or wrong, but clearly just run off a gut feeling that it is is or isn't. You can't just alienate them by calling them stupid and refusing to engage, but neither can you engage them in enough depth to realise the absurdity of their position. I'm entirely fine with calling a politically active right winger a moron and moving on, but when you're dealing with people who consider themselves non-political it's much more difficult. Most of them seem to have liberal definitions so deeply ingrained into their consciousness that it would be incredibly difficult to shake them. I suppose the best you can do is just keep hammering the message politely. big scary monsters posted:Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but you certainly don't have to respect those opinions. If somebody is misinformed or has an interest that would bias their opinion (basically everyone) or is just plain stupid their opinion might well be wrong! Also, even if there is no definitively right answer, some answers are definitely more wrong than others. If you ask me what 2+2 is and I say "about 5" that's not entirely accurate, but it's not nearly as wrong as someone who says -300.17.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Something along the lines of 'The right to free speech must implicitly include the right to rebut the content of that speech, otherwise you're specifically asking for unequal free speech.' I like this, cheers! e: Though I suppose the problem with the second one is that it's something that can be objectively discredited. Political stuff can't really in the same way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:Also to be fair to Enda he must be shiteing it at the moment considering he could be about to be beaten by Sinn loving Fein in an election in a few months. Weeks now. Smart money is at the end of February but they are dragging out announcing a date. In fairness Enda is probably going to get back in, but with some kind of Frankenstein's monster of government stitched together from god knows what that might fall apart before the end of the year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I like this, cheers! Not all of it, perhaps, but an overwhelming amount of the stuff you're likely to disagree with can be pretty strongly discredited, otherwise you wouldn't disagree with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I like this, cheers! Not always. There is no doubt that four cunts from the 80s Tory government are dead, and that is a reason to smile. If only the current retinue matched it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I like this, cheers! The non-existence of an impartial universal standard of morality doesn't afford any kind of protection to repugnant politics. If someone tries to argue it does you may as well just rub that meek hitler ragecomic in their face. Which will probably only get you accused of hyperbole, or an "oh well obviously genocide is bad  ", but this at least establishes that they don't really believe everyone is entitled to their opinion and that there does somewhere exist a line in the sand beyond which action is required. Once they admit the existence of the line, you should have a much easier time moving it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
I feel that's part of the issue, it's less that people won't acknowledge the line, they just are intentionally remaining ignorant of how clear cut it is in everyday life for the sake of being "apolitical".
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
Yeah, it's a deflection used usually because people don't want to talk about it or think about it too much. I'm sure your mum isn't actually a total nihilist, ThomasPaine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2016 21:17
|
|
