|
ronya posted:it's not a great answer - prioritizing ACTUALLY WE LABOUR DEFEND THE NHS exactly plays into the angle Marr is trying to present, rather than furthering Labour's attempt to pin the Tories to the wall on their opposition to Russian sanctions and dependence on Russian donors. The reason the Tories pushed this story the minute the report's release was announced is to paint it as a "both sides" thing - how can you criticise whatever the Tories' Russian involvement is when Labour was also entangled with them around the same time? And that's what Marr is pushing for, he wants Nandy to say Labour did a bad and basically cop to the whole thing. Both sides At the least the PROTECT THE NHS angle says that Labour did it for the right reasons, and if it did turn out that Russia was involved in the leak, that's still information the public deserved to know about. And you can contrast that public interest stuff with the Tories being anti-sanctions and taking Russian money. Looking guilty and implying the previous leadership screwed up (and going on to talk about how they got everything wrong on Russia) just makes both sides look equally corrupt and makes it easier for the Tories to wriggle their way out of the jam e- cat and dog together at last https://twitter.com/pattucheenu/status/1284510929200115712 baka kaba fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Jul 19, 2020 |
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:44 |
|
|
Reminds me of the Stephen Jay Gould quote - yeah some of the posh actors are good, but think of the amazing talent we're missing out on. Regarding the word "liberal", I think it's implanted in people's minds similarly to the word "tolerant" - a passive, zero-effort way of being the good guys*. If you tolerate, or are liberal about, people of colour, gay people, maybe trans people at a push, then you've done your bit and the world will be fine once everyone else catches up with you. Whereas the actual socialist position is to recognise the work that needs to be done to create actual acceptance. Hence "so much for the tolerant left", because liberals are as left as most people's range of apprehension goes without Pink-o-Vision glasses. *socially anyway. The project to make economic liberalism the only sensible option has been so successful it doesn't even count
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:32
|
|
|
josh04 posted:Christopher Eccleston always brings this up in interviews, that when he was starting there were programs and grants and courses for working-class kids to get into the arts, and they've gradually been whittled away until all we have left are Phoebe Waller-Bridges. Daniel Craig also Christopher Eccleston says he basically got blackballed for saying that you could only get ahead these days in acting if you were posh
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Michaela Cole is the hot poo poo right now tho. Guess that's an exception which proves the rule. Yes & no. I think it's an important part of the social safety net. Art for arts sake, it is pretty loving important, y'know? Enriches the soul & all that. I don't have an artistic bone in my body, can't draw, briefly learned how to play a chord on a guitar but long since forgot, certainly never did anything like drama when I was in school (the idea of it as a subject in school is mildly bewildering to my experience). But even just engaging with other peoples art, be it at live shows or on the telly or in a gallery, it really is a powerful good. An overhaul of the welfare system, much needed after the damage IDS & friends have wrecked on it in the last decade, should include more support & encouragement for people of all backgrounds to do poo poo like act or sing or gently caress, row even, despite me thinking rowing is the worst sport & the likes of Eton are doing us a favour by keeping it to the children of the well off. Not because it can rich the economy or even be inspirational that "oh, even more people from my background can do this so maybe I could" but just because it's a good in & of itself. And it's easy to point at Thatcher for butchering the system we had before, but don't forget to tip your hat to New Labour for not doing a single thing to reverse those policies. It may have started with the Tories but it ossified into the new norm under a Labour government.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:35
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:Does anyone have a transcript of the Hitchens column in the mail? I want to see how stupid it is, but also don't want to indulge the Mail with views. https://pastebin.com/pdn27bph I thought Hitchens was supposed to be intelligent, at least as far as atheists held him on a pedestal. This is a badly cobbled together string of unrelated and out of date studies half-arsedly cobbled together into a divorced dad rant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:35
|
|
|
Pro tip the entire new atheist movement was absolute quackery and literally everyone famous attached to it is a massive right wing prick and not even remotely intellectual.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:38
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:The reason the Tories pushed this story the minute the report's release was announced is to paint it as a "both sides" thing - how can you criticise whatever the Tories' Russian involvement is when Labour was also entangled with them around the same time? And that's what Marr is pushing for, he wants Nandy to say Labour did a bad and basically cop to the whole thing. Both sides I don't think anyone ever gets out of Both Sides by playing the "yes, but my motives were good ones  " card - because, as you say, it makes both sides look equally corruptLabour already has the advantage on the NHS. It doesn't need to shore it up more, surely. Conversely it is distrusted on Russia
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:40
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:https://pastebin.com/pdn27bph
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:42
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:https://pastebin.com/pdn27bph That was Christopher (& really he was more of a good polemicst than actually an intellectual). Peter is his brother & he's very much a 19th century conservative. Y'know, Kinder, Küche, Kirche is his whole thing. He's kind of an interesting figure because he's very much outwith the mainstream of the right, he's not a free marketeer & generally favours a more paternalist state. But then you hear on any social issue & it's like "yikes", dude's regressive as gently caress. Was a Trot in youth because lol of course.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:43
|
|
|
Roller Coast Guard posted:That was the other (dead) Hitchens. Bobstar posted:Regarding the word "liberal", I think it's implanted in people's minds similarly to the word "tolerant" - a passive, zero-effort way of being the good guys*. If you tolerate, or are liberal about, people of colour, gay people, maybe trans people at a push, then you've done your bit and the world will be fine once everyone else catches up with you. Whereas the actual socialist position is to recognise the work that needs to be done to create actual acceptance. Plus the name sounds like liberty, freedom and so on. Just from the name it sounds like a good thing, until you find out what the actual people using that name are actively seeking to bring about. It'd be kind of like if pedophiles rebranded into 'the free candy guys,' and the media wholeheartedly started reporting on the BBC's free candy problems. Anyone without an idea of the underlying issues (i.e. everyone) would be left wondering why free candy is suddenly a bad thing and accusing the left of wanting to cancel halloween.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:44
|
|
|
Artschat: the chap who created Silent Witness and New Tricks is a pro-Trump Farage-fan who got kicked off Twitter.DickEmery posted:I know "everything's a bot" is a dangerous trap to fall into but the anti-mask stuff feels very inorganic to me. I (increasingly reluctantly) volunteer for a very well-known first aid organisation and there are mask-truthers here. They are asked to remove any social media posts about masks lowering oxygen levels, but my personal opinion is that their fitness to practice should be suspended. They are supposed to be more medically informed than the general public and should be held to a higher standard.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:55
|
|
|
Jedit posted:The debate about whether the Johnson bastard was born prematurely is a concealment of the real question, which is when it was conceived. Well I mentioned nudge-nudge stories about parentage - there are various rumours about Number 10 staff/bodyguards - while the timing isn't *impossible*, they'd have to be quick workers because the most likely conception date is mid-late July or later, within a month of her moving in. Similarly there are theories in the other direction - Symonds wasn't seen in public in Feb or March, which would give a conception date around the time of the police visit to her flat, but again it's a big old stretch. I've just come up with my own theory (which actually I'm *certain* somebody else will come up with independently) that the kid was conceived by IVF on or immediately after the 10th of August 2019 when certain freezers were opened up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 18:56
|
|
|
New Labour really did want to create cool cultural stuff, mostly as a replacement for heavy industry in the economy - see Cool Britannia. They did do a fair amount of arts investment, particular in Manchester. The fact that basically no major British bands emerged from Blair era Manchester compared to the 60's/70's combo of low cost of living in industrial towns and easily accessible dole should tell you all you need to know about how these strategies compare.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:00
|
|
|
ronya posted:I don't think anyone ever gets out of Both Sides by playing the "yes, but my motives were good ones if you're trying to nail the Tories to the wall over corruption, defending your motives to highlight how indefensible theirs are is the better strategy surely. This whole thing smacks of "the previous It's Starmer's Labour trying to distance themselves from Corbyn's, and they're doing that at the expense of holding the Tories to account... hmm getting deja vu here
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:02
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:New Labour really did want to create cool cultural stuff, mostly as a replacement for heavy industry in the economy - see Cool Britannia. They did do a fair amount of arts investment, particular in Manchester. much of it was flung into theatre, arts centres, arts education, and that kind of thing, and Manchester today still has a resonant local theatre scene. Much of it can be traced to the Labour years in retrospect this was not terribly creative (heh) arts policy, but it did correspond to what arts funding activists wanted. Call it the Billy Elliot view of the role of arts in society. music is tricky... New Labour had an incredibly awkward flirtation with the Britpop boom, but the years thereafter embraced Coldplay's anonymity of place, and it's hard to argue that Labour had anything to do with its success ronya fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Jul 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
Lady Demelza posted:Artschat: the chap who created Silent Witness and New Tricks is a pro-Trump Farage-fan who got kicked off Twitter. That reminds me of a number of years ago where one of the creators of Midsomer's Murder was like "yes there are no/very few BAME people in our show. That's because this show wouldn't work if there was more racial diversity in it. This show is supposed to be the last bastion of Englishness." Looking at his IMDB page, I don't think he has done much work on TV since. The Question IRL fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Jul 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:20
|
|
|
quote:prevented the free worship of God for the first time in 800 years
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:if you're trying to nail the Tories to the wall over corruption, defending your motives to highlight how indefensible theirs are is the better strategy surely. This whole thing smacks of "the previous it's not a corruption story, but a national security/foreign influence story, I would say. Hence the RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA tone. It would turn into a corruption story if there was an identifiable quid pro quo even if it were a corruption story, arguing that good motives justify the means is I think an (appropriately revealing) misread - the base readily forgives good motives (because they don't actually care about the Russia angle but do care about the motives) but the intended audience of going on Marr every week would not
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:https://pastebin.com/pdn27bph Peter Hitchens posted:Now it (the state) presumes to tell us what to wear. And what it wants us to wear is a soggy cloth muzzle, a face-nappy that turns its wearer from a normal human into a mumbling, mouthless submissive. Ahahaha what the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:33
|
|
|
In fairness, there is a valid reason to worry about billions of disposable masks being thrown away every month, but the rest is just nonsense
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:38
|
|
|
ronya posted:it's not a corruption story, but a national security/foreign influence story, I would say. Hence the RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA tone. It would turn into a corruption story if there was an identifiable quid pro quo sure it's not going to win everyone over, but I'm disputing your take that copping to "Labour used stuff from  Russian agents during the same period" without even trying to point out the difference is "furthering Labour's attempt to pin the Tories to the wall on their opposition to Russian sanctions and dependence on Russian donors"it's more like the Tories trying to pin Labour to the wall as a distraction and Labour going "oh hey I'll sort myself out, pass me the staple gun"
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:45
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:Ahahaha what the gently caress I have no mouth and i must tut.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 19:50
|
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:It's propaganda for the English not the Scots. I'm not sure how committed the SNP are to Scottish independence vs just agitating for it whilst enjoying being in power. The only way they're getting independence is with civil disobedience, withholding tax receipts etc, which they aren't going to do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:sure it's not going to win everyone over, but I'm disputing your take that copping to "Labour used stuff from folks ITT are pretty left-wing and frequently complain about people who are not left-wing viewing politics as a Oxford Union 'good show chaps, let's do this again next week' affair keeping that in mind, and that most folks are indeed not left wing, the sense of injustice being appealed to here is "if the Russians offered you something you would really politically benefit from, would you take it, since you're on here saying that the report shows that the Tories can't be trusted etc.". "yes, because my politics are Correct and the benefits we would receive are just ones, NHS NHS NHS" is, to be clear, a terrible answer. There are definitely audiences for this message, but it's probably not to be found on Marr. Again: it is not what the Russians use their influence to do (oh no, they saved the NHS... what a disaster...) but that the Russians are using their influence to distort the just world of Are Democracy. Nandy does not offer this answer, for which we should be thankful "no, but just to remind you, we really benefited from it and we're not at all sorry about that" is... I mean, why the detour into explaining that. Marr even bails her out of her rambling answer and prompts her back on-track. A more hostile interviewer would have just handed her more rope. As a one-off thing, it's probably just a brainfart in switching gears from one audience to another that we're sitting around overanalyzing now. ideally she should have just jumped straight to the clearly pre-briefed position of No and then switched the topic back to Conservative policy ronya fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Jul 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
winegums posted:I'm not sure how committed the SNP are to Scottish independence vs just agitating for it whilst enjoying being in power. The only way they're getting independence is with civil disobedience, withholding tax receipts etc, which they aren't going to do. we have a collaborater here
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I have no mouth and i must tut.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 20:35
|
|
|
quote:A potential cluster of Covid-19 cases is being investigated in North Lanarkshire, health officials have confirmed. I've stared at these two sentences for over a minute now and can't think of a single thing to say about them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
ronya posted:folks ITT are pretty left-wing and frequently complain about people who are not left-wing viewing politics as a Oxford Union 'good show chaps, let's do this again next week' affair I'd prefer an answer along the lines of "the british people deserve to know what their government is doing with our NHS, are you saying we should keep that from them? Just because we don't approve of the messenger?" You know, frame it as issues of important information, the people's right to know and decide, "what Russia wants" being irrelevant because we (PEOPLE OF BRITANE) make our own judgements. Nothing about personal benefit, no "we did it because it was politically good for us", because that's obviously a bad look? Nandy's whole "I wasn't involved but" bit was still along the right lines (albeit unconvincing because she wasn't trying to be), I don't get how you see this intervention as helpful quote:LN: ...I mean, look I get that TEH RUSSIANS is a lever that gets pulled whenever it's convenient and ignored when it isn't, which is why it's important for Labour to own their own actions instead of immediately folding and conceding accusations that they're doing what Russia wants. That's not going to make you look better to the people who care about these things, it's not going to make it easier to hold the Tories to account - like this whole thing is already the Tory strategy for deflecting the fallout of the report onto Labour. What I'm saying is Starmer's Labour doesn't care about any of that, because they want to draw a line under the past. So do the Tories in this case, win-win baka kaba fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Jul 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:I've stared at these two sentences for over a minute now and can't think of a single thing to say about them. Personally I would hope that every outbreak involves a call centre which carries out coronavirus contact tracing for the NHS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I'm the religious tolerance of James II and VII. plus Edward vi, Mary, elizabeth, Cromwell etc, even if you're just counting Christians (it's only 730 years since the edict of expulsion) also Catholic emancipation was only a couple of hundred years ago, unless freedom of worship very specifically only applies to being able to hold services e: now I'm wondering why he chose 800 years, and the only thing I can think of is the papal interdict? and I've just remembered Wycliffe and the Lollards I think he must mean specifically the last time the activity of churches of the established faith was disrupted en masse (although even then they didn't close completely) which is a very esoteric definition of "free worship of God" XMNN fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Jul 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 21:37
|
|
|
Anyone heard from Jabby? Wondering how he is. Last post he made he'd been tested positive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 21:44
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:I've stared at these two sentences for over a minute now and can't think of a single thing to say about them. at least they'll be able to trace contacts a bit easier for this one
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 21:47
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:
In reality, the Russian dossier was used, did not win the election, and so did not defend the NHS. All raising it did was change the topic of discussion from ‘can the Tories be trusted’ to ‘can the Russian security services be trusted’. Relying on them was a clear tactical and campaigning blunder. Trying to argue otherwise Is just repeating the same kind of avoidable mistake‘. Never get into a argument where your side is weak on a position that doesn’t need to be taken.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Anyone heard from Jabby? Wondering how he is. Last post he made he'd been tested positive. He's been posting in the Health Care Stories thread in the Goon Doctor
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 22:06
|
|
|
This is my favourite bit: “The scientific papers in favour of muzzling are full of weak, hesitant words such as ‘probably, ‘could’ and ‘may’ – which can equally well be expressed as ‘probably not’, ‘could not’ or ‘may not’. (...) This hasn’t been done with muzzles, probably because it would be a bit difficult and possibly because muzzle zealots fear the results would not help their case.” Possibly... or possibly not!
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I'm talking about the "orthodox left" wing of Labour, based on Jeremy Gilberts analysis of the party consisting of 4 wings; Legit appreciate the clarifiying response, actual thanks. I don't think a two year difference justifies 'rebuilding' language though, and passing that massive difference in results off as 'oh Labour had slowly been losing those seats for decades actually' is obviously a dishonest cope. Lots of you seem to think 'liberals' means 'Liberal Democrat voters', that's extremely dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
XMNN posted:plus Edward vi, Mary, elizabeth, Cromwell etc, even if you're just counting Christians (it's only 730 years since the edict of expulsion) Beginning to suspect that it means "free worship of God in the manner that I, Peter Hitchens, chooses to" Guavanaut fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Jul 19, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
Vitamin P posted:Lots of you seem to think 'liberals' means 'Liberal Democrat voters', that's extremely dumb. No, lots of people are saying that LibDem voters are liberals. There's a difference.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
XMNN posted:I think he must mean specifically the last time the activity of churches of the established faith was disrupted en masse (although even then they didn't close completely) which is a very esoteric definition of "free worship of God" I bet he's just thinking Magna Carta made us free. Articles 1 and 63 said the English church should be free, and obviously a piece of paper changes everything..
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:44 |
|
|
kingturnip posted:No, lots of people are saying that LibDem voters are liberals. There's a difference. Post-coalition Lib Dem voters are neoliberals for sure, actual scum, but the Lib Dems collapsed vote share proves the existence of liberals that aren't neoliberals. That segment includes the good-faith liberals that like the socially lefty/liberal stuff and are not wedded to the neofeudalist modern capitalism poo poo, many of them are receptive to lefty economic ideas and proved it in 2017. You've completely misread the conversation over the last few pages, it was libs being conflated with Lib Dem voters. The inverse you're suggesting isn't even a point it's yeah no poo poo water is wet it's nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2020 22:48
|
|