|
TinTower posted:The Mail have found a new enemy: as one of the donors I'm delighted they so mad
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:26 |
|
|
Spangly A posted:as one of the donors I'm delighted they so mad I'm quite pleased they got the gendering correct on the subtitle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I think I'm technically on call every day, so yeah it'd be nice to be able to tell my lot "gently caress off I'm not doing it". I'd more more up for it if they payed me for the 9/10 times I don't have to come in. They're just gonna make us come in and do nothing, aren't they?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
Total Meatlove posted:If you read the Eye they have a fortnightly section devoted to the spat between the MOS and the Mail, and how the MoS line is usually taken purely to annoy Dacre I'd like to hear more about this
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
Miftan posted:I'd more more up for it if they payed me for the 9/10 times I don't have to come in. They're just gonna make us come in and do nothing, aren't they? I think that's how it would work, if you're on call and do nothing you get paid, if they don't want to pay you you can tell them to gently caress off if they need you to come in. I'll quite happily sit in the cafe and listen to podcasts for money. I might even post in UKMT while I do it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm quite pleased they got the gendering correct on the subtitle. I'm fairly certain that "women having sex changes on the NHS", with the womb implication, is incorrect pronouning but it's also the sort of multiple-tense-implied cases where I scratch my head and just smile and avoid pronouns, so def. an improvement on the whole
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:20
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:I'm fairly certain that "women having sex changes on the NHS", with the womb implication, is incorrect pronouning That bit is but they got it right about four times which I think is good for the mail.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:24
|
|
|
TinTower posted:The Mail have found a new enemy: Its too small to read, but I assume the asterisk in FREE* BAG OF COMPOST caveats the spiritual cost of having bought The Mail.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
I think the story is about whether fertility treatment should be paid for by the taxpayer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
Breath Ray posted:I think the story is about whether fertility treatment should be paid for by the taxpayer. If it was just about that then I doubt they'd be leading with "SEX-CHANGE MEN"
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm quite pleased they got the gendering correct on the subtitle. I suppose if you want to look for a very tiny glimmer of a silver lining in that front page, it's that ten years ago it probably wouldn't have been a story, because it would have been "Women to give birth" to the vast majority of people. I know there's still a very long way to go but trans rights really do seem to have come on leaps and bounds in this century. Unfortunately of course it's giving shitheads new and exciting ways to be shitheads but it's still progress.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
Munin posted:So down with authoritarianism and up with liberalism unless it happens to be a left wing authoritarian regime which have traditionally turned out fine? https://twitter.com/dril/status/473265809079693312
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
TinTower posted:The Mail have found a new enemy: Oh look, we're back to advocating forced sterilization.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Angepain posted:If it was just about that then I doubt they'd be leading with "SEX-CHANGE MEN" That's just the newest wrinkle, why its called a news paper  Is there a nhs charter that sets out what it can and can't pay for BTW?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:01
|
|
|
Munin posted:So down with authoritarianism and up with liberalism unless it happens to be a left wing authoritarian regime which have traditionally turned out fine? Liberally permissive states have historically been some of the biggest backers of chattel slavery, workhouses, child labor, slumlords, and plain letting people die in the gutter. Every time abolitionists or labor unions used force to combat that, the slavers and slumlords were the first to cry 'Tyranny!' and demand that their freedoms be upheld. Do you believe there is a qualitative difference between the use of violence to oppose these forces that are themselves inherently violent and "wouldn't it be great if we killed all the poors and blacks"? If not then we may as well throw all nuance out of the window and just wring our hands saying "all violence is bad" while people are actually being harmed and killed en masse. The people doing that also tend to be doing so from a position of relative comfort, at least until the rot reaches them. If you do believe that there is a qualitative difference, then the question becomes whether such violence is still occurring today in liberal permissive societies, such as whether you believe that the treatment of the disabled under austerity constitutes violence. And if so, whether you believe that there are any peaceful ways to combat it. Peaceful resolutions should be given priority, but I don't really consider "let's sit on our hands until they run out of disabled" to be a peaceful solution. In fact that sounds more like the death squads and purges.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
Anyone know what's actually going on with this? TV hustings on Monday night cancelled. Kind of annoying http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/30/corbyn-accused-of-bottling-hustings-with-smith-after-rejecting-debate?CMP=twt_gu
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Munin posted:So down with authoritarianism and up with liberalism unless it happens to be a left wing authoritarian regime which have traditionally turned out fine? I don't like people talking about violent revolution in UKMT because its unrealistic, petulant and dumb. However, there is a large distance between wanting to rid the world of "poors, blacks, homosexuals, jews" and wanting to use force against powerful abusers. Also lets all admit there have been occasions historically where violent revolt was neeeded to overthrow a regime or whatever and it didn't always devolve into a fascist government that burns dogs in the streets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
Breath Ray posted:That's just the newest wrinkle, why its called a news paper
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
I'm not sure it's very nice to poors blacks gays and jews to compare them to tories. Like the world actually would be a better place if all the tories caught some sort of communicable brain disorder that only affected people who support their policies. Because their policies are bad and serve primarily to hurt the majority for the benefit of the elite. Which makes them bad people and if they stopped being bad people things would be better, either they can drop the bad or they can drop the people, whichever is easiest. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 15:21 on Jul 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/IainAngus/status/759749643169177600
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
I don't think anyone likes anyone in this country. We're all wound up. Some of us want to kill the rich, more want to kill the poor (including other poor people). We hate bad drivers, we hate bikes, we hate buses, we hate immigrants, we hate the Scottish, we hate the English. When the inevitable collapse of society happens it's going to be so bloody. Munin posted:So down with authoritarianism and up with liberalism unless it happens to be a left wing authoritarian regime which have traditionally turned out fine? As a supporter of violence in politics let me say that if I thought there was a peaceful method i'd be all for it. But when the opposition has made it clear nothing will ever change via normal democratic means then what do you do? Give up? Write a petition? When Jo Cox was killed the correct course of action would have been to kill a number of UKIP, BNP and C-18 members. As it stands the hard right knows that violence works. Jo Cox is dead and will stay dead. We're leaving the EU and everything is hosed. The path of non-violence is here and now. Isn't it great? Regarde Aduck fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Jul 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Like the world actually would be a better place if all the tories caught some sort of communicable brain disorder that only affected people who support their policies.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7095134.stm
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:I don't like people talking about violent revolution in UKMT because its unrealistic, petulant and dumb. It's nearly as unrealistic as hoping for socialism through the mechanisms of liberal democracy!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
There's a pelican crossing near my place which I use most days and if there's a cyclist approaching on the road I just wait for them to go through even if the traffic light is red and the green man is up. Plenty of cyclists stop for red lights but the number that don't bother mean it's not worth the risk. I'm sure cyclists have plenty of horror stories about pedestrians too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Yesterday's front page made me laugh out loud. The mail was actually against plastic bags all the time. This is not a joke. I read the mail and they hated bags.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Namtab posted:The mail was actually against plastic bags all the time. This is not a joke. I read the mail and they hated bags. Actually I can kind of see that, from a save-the-grate-british-countryside these-drat-modern-inventions perspective
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Wonder how much of it is tied up in nostalgia for brown paper bags which would be ironic, because they're almost just as bad for the environment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
The reason why their story was negative when the charge came in was because they wanted a blanket charge instead of nuances about the size of shop etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Munin posted:Unless, of course, you think that killing millions of people to shore up your totalitarian regime whilst claiming it will usher in a utopian communist future is great, in which case gently caress you. Well thousands are dying to line Sainsbury's pockets so none of us get to wash anything off our hands and pretending violent action is "beneath" this is a sure fire way to gently caress yourself straight to hell OwlFancier posted:Like the world actually would be a better place if all the tories caught some sort of communicable brain disorder that only affected people who support their policies. Because their policies are bad and serve primarily to hurt the majority for the benefit of the elite. Which makes them bad people and if they stopped being bad people things would be better, either they can drop the bad or they can drop the people, whichever is easiest. This is a factual statement, the world would be better if everyone caught thinking like a neocon was shot on sight and I can't see the liberal handwaving because there's a lot of disabled corpses in the way Spangly A fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Jul 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
I'm not interested in murder or violence, I just want them to have to live the lives of those their policies affect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
Namtab posted:I'm not interested in murder or violence, I just want them to have to live the lives of those their policies affect. That's a bit violent. And potentially murderous. I mean assuming you mean you want them to starve and then get drone striked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:Wonder how much of it is tied up in nostalgia for brown paper bags which would be ironic, because they're almost just as bad for the environment. Really?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Namtab posted:I'm not interested in murder or violence, I just want them to have to live the lives of those their policies affect. I don't think anyone here is, it's just really insulting to pretend the status quo isn't already violent and murderous. You're a nurse. I'm not going to play horrible death top trumps with you, but I can't count on one hand the people I've watched take their last breath who had no reason to die when they did other than the long effect of government policy. Nobody is calling for glorious revolution or trading arms dealers because "thousands" is probably less deaths than a left wing milita would need to change the political landscape enough to save said thousands. And so for now, we watch Jeremy Corbyn attempt to play nice with a pack of wolves in damaged clothing. The media is certainly the most vulnerable but also the easiest to fix legislatively, which is why their attack on Corbyn won't cease.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
To me, one of many necessary conditions for political violence to be acceptable is that it has to be substantially more effective in fixing the situation than political self-harm. We're not there yet, and won't be for a very long time. Generally Tories kill the poor indirectly by neglect and delude themselves into believing it's not happening rather than as an end in and of itself. So when a benefit claimant self-immolates in a job centre, that makes people question their beliefs, because no-one would rather do that if the alternative was just Getting On and Being A Striver. When someone stabs an MP, that mostly confirms people's beliefs that their movement is insane and dangerous - it might not have shifted the Brexit vote to Remain, but it definitely hurt the far right more than it helped them. It's also a juvenile and dangerous fantasy that removing any one person from power, even Murdoch, could actually fix what's wrong with this country. Even if every single Tory minister and newspaper owner were to drop dead of natural causes tomorrow, their like-thinking subordinates would take their places, Tory voters would still be the same noxious mixture of gullible morons and selfish pricks, and things would more or less carry on as they have been. Any path to victory other than persuading people we're right has to involve a pretty seismic change to the electorate - something on the order of Scottish independence for Scotland or massively increased regional devolution for the rest of us. Even a literal revolution, which would almost certainly end with a dictatorship far worse than what we have now, would only be possible if most of the country was willing to go along with it. Frankly, the whole idea that liberalism is bad and evil and should be thrown away at the earliest opportunity for pragmatic reasons loving baffles me considering that if it wasn't for liberalism the right would have won long ago. Do you think we'd be in a better position if the forces of capital were able to censor, jail or shoot leftists on a whim? Because I'm pretty sure they have more guns than we do! The main reason they don't is that most people (even Tories!) have developed a nebulous yet strong sense that That Would Make Them The Baddies. If leftwing violence were to become widespread then that sense would gradually go away, and then everything would go even further to poo poo in very short order. (And no, that doesn't seem to apply to far right Now I remember why I rarely read this thread...
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Liberalism isn't "don't shoot people" and that's as far as I got with that nonsense Acting as if Liberalism protects us from capital is loving lunacy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
The preclude to political violence will be when the "middle class" becomes disaffected with their conditions and the right runs out of plausible scapegoats.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
Namtab posted:The mail was actually against plastic bags all the time. This is not a joke. I read the mail and they hated bags. *draws venn diagram for anime and the daily mail* hmm yes, yes
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:*draws venn diagram for anime and the daily mail* Read as in past tense, not present
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
pumpinglemma posted:To me, one of many necessary conditions for political violence to be acceptable is that it has to be substantially more effective in fixing the situation than political self-harm. We're not there yet, and won't be for a very long time. Generally Tories kill the poor indirectly by neglect and delude themselves into believing it's not happening rather than as an end in and of itself. So when a benefit claimant self-immolates in a job centre, that makes people question their beliefs, because no-one would rather do that if the alternative was just Getting On and Being A Striver. When someone stabs an MP, that mostly confirms people's beliefs that their movement is insane and dangerous - it might not have shifted the Brexit vote to Remain, but it definitely hurt the far right more than it helped them. Liberalism is here instead of totalitarianism largely because liberalism is more effective than totalitarianism at empowering the elite. I appreciate that it isn't obvious if you aren't looking for it, and that's part of its strength, but liberalism is always couched in the idea that the wealthy and powerful have a right to be so (and unspokenly, though sometimes not so, that the poor and powerless are rightly poor and powerless) and that challenging that order, that deeply illiberal state is an attack on the concept of Freedom itself. Liberalism as it stands is the enshrinement so completely in a culture, of the idea that power should beget more power and weakness is a moral failing and should be punished, that these are regarded as virtues rather than injustices. In such a culture, what is the need for armed repression? People will repress themselves and each other for questioning the order that keeps them down. The government doesn't oppose an active police state because they believe it's wrong, they simply don't see a point in having an overt one because what's the need? If you give people a visible force of oppression to fight against they'll fight it, when you instead convince them from birth that they should oppress themselves and their neighbors, you don't need any armed gunmen to tell them what to do. They have absolutely no respect for the important freedoms of the people they rule, that's why every communication you send is monitored and every penny you earn is fed back into the pockets of the wealthy, every public service is reorganized to profit the powerful at the expense of the public who built it, and every freedom you can point to as a triumph of liberalism is invariably corollaried by (as long as you have the money). OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Jul 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:26 |
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:Really? There's apparently more energy wasted in their manufacture and transportation than plastic and pulping produces a lot of air pollution. It evens out a lot more with them being recyclable though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 16:58
|
|