|
Shogi posted:https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/jan/16/i-thrived-on-the-tension-and-drama-of-british-politics-then-i-had-a-heart-attack lol i really wonder how many comments were mocking him that he should have died if every single comment is moderated down to "YOU ARE THE BEST JOURNALIST THE GUARDIAN EVER"
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 06:44 |
|
|
imagine getting a heart attack because people yelled at you online.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 21:10
|
|
|
He makes clear he has a heart attack cause he's got heart conditions on both sides of the family and is unfit It's just he blames Corbyn anyway for being too racist and terrifying
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 21:26
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 21:35
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DMiliband/status/1350471514064355329?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 21:44
|
|
|
what a oval office
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 21:44
|
|
|
twoday posted:British blue cheese is good why are you eating peat moss 
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 21:53
|
|
|
maybe it's because im not British, but I literally cannot understand the corbyn = raging anti-semite thing. like, I can understand it coming from tories and other chuds, but where do these libs get it from? has he ever done anything except that one picture?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
oliwan posted:maybe it's because im not British, but I literally cannot understand the corbyn = raging anti-semite thing. like, I can understand it coming from tories and other chuds, but where do these libs get it from? has he ever done anything except that one picture? post Zionism is anti Semitic. anti zionism is right out
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
oliwan posted:maybe it's because im not British, but I literally cannot understand the corbyn = raging anti-semite thing. like, I can understand it coming from tories and other chuds, but where do these libs get it from? has he ever done anything except that one picture? The Guardian did also push it op.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
oliwan posted:maybe it's because im not British, but I literally cannot understand the corbyn = raging anti-semite thing. like, I can understand it coming from tories and other chuds, but where do these libs get it from? has he ever done anything except that one picture? He's done nothing except the mural thing. The rest is just whole-cloth bullshit in the style of "if enough people repeat it, it becomes true" style.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:01
|
|
|
genericnick posted:The Guardian did also push it op. i know, that's what I mean.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:02
|
|
|
oliwan posted:i know, that's what I mean. They did not actually believe it themselves of course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:04
|
|
|
here's a guy that has literally worked all his life to improve the lives of the marginalised, including jewish people. then theres one dumb picture in front of a mural and now he's literally hitler.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
AOC never met Corbyn because her aides told her he was an antisemite and was losing because of it
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:07
|
|
|
oliwan posted:here's a guy that has literally worked all his life to improve the lives of the marginalised, including jewish people. t
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:07
|
|
|
oliwan posted:i know, that's what I mean. The Guardian did not want an anti-imperialist leftist to win, so they had every interest in circulating it for the same reasons the Tory papers did. According to media analysis they actually ended up flogging it harder than the Right
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:08
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:AOC never met Corbyn because her aides told her he was an antisemite and was losing because of it This should have been a warning
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:09
|
|
|
multijoe posted:The Guardian did not want an anti-imperialist leftist to win, so they had every interest in circulating it for the same reasons the Tory papers did. According to media analysis they actually ended up flogging it harder than the Right yeah and I understand that from the guardian's pov. I obviously don't agree but my brain can process this. it's just that I really don't understand how individual libs come to the conclusion that he is an anti-semite, because there's literally nothing there in support of that. like how does that guy write a whole thing about his fear of corbyn, when all that corbyn has ever done is fight against anti-semitism? I just can't process it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:12
|
|
|
oliwan posted:yeah and I understand that from the guardian's pov. I obviously don't agree but my brain can process this. it's just that I really don't understand how individual libs come to the conclusion that he is an anti-semite, because there's literally nothing there in support of that. like how does that guy write a whole thing about his fear of corbyn, when all that corbyn has ever done is fight against anti-semitism? I just can't process it. My take is that it comes from the same place as QAnon. It's a convenient justification for your hostile opposition to your political enemies without having to examine their or your own material political goals, it makes you feel like a noble hero taking a stand for against these horrific monsters and there's enough other people mutually reinforcing these beliefs that you never have to question if you're actually on the right path or are full of poo poo (after all, how could this many Jews be wrong?) Just don't expect to hear much in the way of analysis on the subject even in Left media because you would at some point have to violate the Macpherson principle by suggesting a Jewish person's perspective on the issue may not be entirely valid or rooted in reality
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:25
|
|
|
IIRC three major Jewish newspapers as well as the Board of Deputies of British Jews (which seems to be the major Jewish representative organisation in the UK) came out publically in calling Jeremy Corbyn out as anti-semitic. That probably helped convince a lot of people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:27
|
|
|
oliwan posted:maybe it's because im not British, but I literally cannot understand the corbyn = raging anti-semite thing. like, I can understand it coming from tories and other chuds, but where do these libs get it from? has he ever done anything except that one picture? Well I am British and I don’t get it either. I’ve ever seen or heard of a shred of evidence on the news or in any papers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:30
|
|
|
oliwan posted:i know, that's what I mean. It gives them the excuse they need to turn against an actual left-wing party when it had a real chance at power. The Guardian-reading demographic is - whether they actually recognise it themselves or not - deeply scared of actual socialism that would change the status quo, raise their taxes, make owning a holiday home in Cornwall socially unacceptable, smash the independent education sector and generally burst their cosy affluent Home Counties upper-middle-class white-collar professional bubble. They forge a social, political and professional identity in hand-wringing about how nasty and uncouth the Tories are, how stupid and base you'd have to be to vote for them, and how appalling the effects of their policies are...and how they themselves are against everything the Conservatives stand for and would never consider voting for them. And they may even talk up how great and fair social democracy would be, usually safe in the knowledge that no party with any potential to actually change things actually exists. Labour under Corbyn presented The Guardian and a lot of its readership with everything they've supposedly been clamouring for since Thatcher was in No.10. And when faced with the actual prospect of a genuinely radical leftward shift to British politics and society they had to come up with an acceptable reason as to why they couldn't vote for it. So they went fully on the Labour Antisemitism Crisis angle, and how Corbyn himself personally lusted to renew the Holocaust because he said something against removing a questionable mural. Against all the other evidence to the contrary. It let them tell themselves "Of course I liked much of what Labour was offering in 2019, but I couldn't have accepted Corbyn as Prime Minister because he was such a horrible racist." That's why The Guardian was one of the most vehemently anti-Corbyn papers of all. And then they had the gall to still come out and officially support Labour...about two days before the election when it would make no difference after two years of printing angsty think-pieces about how he was an unelectable racist and Labour's policies Just Aren't Credible. Never forget that The Guardian was founded to be the voice of Manchester cotton mill owners who were all old-school Liberals of the hyper-capitalist rugged-individual sort. It was strong against organised labour. It ran a campaign against the laws that would lead to a 10 hour working day and, though it took a strong anti-slavery and Abolitionist stance, then served up some classic early centrist pearl-clutching about how slavery was Bad and the Confederacy was Evil but a Civil War wasn't the right way to solve such problems. The Guardian instead argued that Britain should trade with the CSA and use that economic leverage to end slavery with the power of the free market. In the 1940s The Guardian opposed the formation of the NHS on eugenics grounds (free healthcare would let weak people ruin the nation's gene pool) and it urged readers to vote Churchill and remove the Attlee government in 1951, supposedly because Labour's rhetoric was divisive and not  enough. Sound familiar?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:43
|
|
|
Yeah, those mostly cover it. The libs are super weak against the "my lived experience" approach especially when it comes from a place of authority to boot. I'd add two more: It got to him. He kept talking up how antisemitism has no place in the Labour party and the more statements he sent out and actions he took the more they knew their hits were landing. No smoke without a fire and so no. Second, for a lot of people "antisemitism" can serve as a stand in for "he likes the Muslims too much".
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:54
|
|
|
oliwan posted:yeah and I understand that from the guardian's pov. I obviously don't agree but my brain can process this. it's just that I really don't understand how individual libs come to the conclusion that he is an anti-semite, because there's literally nothing there in support of that. like how does that guy write a whole thing about his fear of corbyn, when all that corbyn has ever done is fight against anti-semitism? I just can't process it. are you american? think about how american libs preponderantly think that bernie is uniquely sexist and that the average bernie supporter is a young white frat bro who spends all their time harassing women on twitter like everyone else is saying, it's a convenient lie that comfortable liberals buy into because it gives them an excuse to not support the policies they view themselves as supporting in the abstract. it gains a lot of play among the media and professional classes because they all view themselves as being good social democrats and/or progressives but the actual implementation of raising taxes on the rich or letting minorities go to their kids' schools is discomfiting. saying you support progressivisim while sabotaging it from happening gets you the feeling of being a Good Person without any of the painful stuff
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:56
|
|
|
oliwan posted:yeah and I understand that from the guardian's pov. I obviously don't agree but my brain can process this. it's just that I really don't understand how individual libs come to the conclusion that he is an anti-semite, because there's literally nothing there in support of that. like how does that guy write a whole thing about his fear of corbyn, when all that corbyn has ever done is fight against anti-semitism? I just can't process it. its coz after making the story up they simultaneously forget making it up and start believing it in literally hours, especially once their story starts getting coverage then after a while they've been talking about it and literally thinking about it so hard they're making themselves sick so they can't ever come back to reality because it would be too embarassing
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:57
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:are you american? think about how american libs preponderantly think that bernie is uniquely sexist and that the average bernie supporter is a young white frat bro who spends all their time harassing women on twitter its also that if you live in a sexist society you will want it to turn out that actually the feminist person WAS THE REAL SEXIST all along and your society is fine racism is very deeply entrenched in british culture but its far more repressed and forbidden to talk about than it is in the US
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 23:02
|
|
|
endlessmonotony posted:He's done nothing except the mural thing. The mural thing was also BS. The mural contained 6 caricatures of real-life figures. 2 of them were Jewish, the other 4 were very white men of Anglo-Saxon descent. The whole idea of it being anti-Semitic came from the right-wing propagandists who projected that, since it showed elitists pulling the strings, they must all be Jews because in their mindset Jews secretly control the world. Only 2 of the figures in the mural, Nathaniel Rothschild and Paul Warburg, were of Jewish descent. The other 4, John D Rockefeller, JP Morgan, Aleister Crowley and Andrew Carnegie were very definitely not part of a secret Jewish cabal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 00:06
|
|
|
10000 Sex Arses posted:The mural thing was also BS. The mural contained 6 caricatures of real-life figures. 2 of them were Jewish, the other 4 were very white men of Anglo-Saxon descent. Yes, the mural had two Jews (portrayed in a very 1930s pamphlet style at that) as part of a globalist cabal secretly pulling the world's strings, it was very definitely antisemitic. That's why the right loved it so loving much, because it did pin Corbyn next to an actual smoking gun of weird left-antisemitism e: the mural, for reference 
No Dignity has issued a correction as of 00:20 on Jan 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 00:16
|
|
|
wtf does Aleister Crowley have to do with it
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 01:09
|
|
|
mistermojo posted:wtf does Aleister Crowley have to do with it He was quite influential at the time. Here's a link which I have skimmed through not read in depth and can't really comment for accuracy or interpretation but with that caveat seems to be a reasonable summary: https://attackthesystem.com/2012/07/01/the-whole-of-the-law-the-political-dimensions-of-crowleys-thought/
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 01:20
|
|
|
The mural seems more edgelord poo poo if anything. The bankers and corporations CONTROL your thoughts WAKE UP SHEEPLE.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 01:23
|
|
|
mrmcd posted:The mural seems more edgelord poo poo if anything. In my (very humble) opinion, had I been Corbyn looking at a picture of that mural then I would have read it entirely as an anti-capitalist/exploitation image.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 01:29
|
|
|
And the Rothschild is depicted as a hooked nose and bearded Fagan looking guy because...?mrmcd posted:The mural seems more edgelord poo poo if anything. This is mostly correct, it i all of these things but also (((zionist elite bankers))) are part of the vision too
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 01:36
|
|
|
oliwan posted:yeah and I understand that from the guardian's pov. I obviously don't agree but my brain can process this. it's just that I really don't understand how individual libs come to the conclusion that he is an anti-semite, because there's literally nothing there in support of that. like how does that guy write a whole thing about his fear of corbyn, when all that corbyn has ever done is fight against anti-semitism? I just can't process it. Two other ridiculous things that got Corbyn accused of anti-semitism: When asked what he would get Boris Johnson for an xmas present, he answered "A Christmas Carol" by Charles Dickens. Reason for this being anti-semitic? Because Dickens wrote Oliver Twist and that has Fagin in it. Fagin is somewhat of a caricature. When asked something in an interview where his response included reference to Jeffrey Epstein, he first pronounced Epstein as Epschtine and then corrected himself to Epstine (as in the pronunciation of our very own Brian Epstein and rhyming with Einstein, Frankenstein). Major prat Baddiel (a former 'comedian' who was never as funny as Rob Newman) claimed on twitter to his audience of over 100000 that 'every Jew listening to that interview will have felt a stab through the heart' because J Epstein pronounces it as 'Epsteen'. He was being serious. Oh another one, he wrote a forward to a reprint of an academic book on capitalism from the 1920s that contained IIRC and I'm not googling to check 4 lines out of hundreds of pages that were anti-semitic. The academic book had been used for decades and praised by many including some (Guardian AGAIN I think) who now accused JC of anti-semitism (on the basis of writing the forward). Jaeluni Asjil has issued a correction as of 02:17 on Jan 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 01:44
|
|
|
The mural was legitimately antisemitic, and it's pretty much the only legitimately antisemitic thing Corbyn was actually associated with, that's why it stands out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 01:53
|
|
|
oliwan posted:maybe it's because im not British, but I literally cannot understand the corbyn = raging anti-semite thing. like, I can understand it coming from tories and other chuds, but where do these libs get it from? has he ever done anything except that one picture? it's really simple after decades of hard work the neolibs thought they were done, the "let's make life a bit better for the regular people" politicians were soundly defeated and marginalized and the two wings of capital saw a future that consisted of david camerons and keir starmers trading places in the big chair with nothing of economic importance ever changing in comes corbyn, who is a character straight out of a fantasy novel about an unlikely hero who saves the kingdom and gets the crown except this isn't a fantasy novel but ugly reality he's elected as leader of labour against all odds, kids are chanting his name, there is a sense of leftist revitalization, something is in the air, and then he even loses that one election against theresa may but by a lot less than expected and she has to go into coalition with the DUP etc., it's incredible neolibs are scrambling, they've been throwing poo poo at the wall and trying to make it stick but all that's happened is louder chants of "oh jeremy corbyn" at music festivals, and then something finally sticks - antisemitism it's ludicrous, it's idiotic, it's laughable, but all the scum have found an in and they're pushing it HARD now, from the daily mail to the guardian and then they win, corbyn is out, forensic starmer is in, the end the lesson is (IMO of course) that when you get into power you have to crush your internal enemies, see them driven before you, hear the lamentations of their columnists and I'm not joking here, deal from strength or get crushed every time (stopped clock etc.), brutality wins, jam grandpas in jumpers lose
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 02:10
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:
Corbyn's big mistake (and that's because he's the person he is) was to try to work with them, thinking they were acting in good faith when of course they weren't. He should have done what all the papers were accusing him of anyway and done whatever was in his power to get shut of them. A mistake frequently made by those on the left is assuming people want peace and harmony and are acting in good faith.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 02:32
|
|
|
Starmer didn't actually get in to anywhere, he's being the very ineffective leader of the Opposition That Doesn't Oppose Anything and probably is flying out as soon as the Brexit mess is over with. The Labour Right did everything they could to oppose their own party and as a result the other right-wingers got in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 06:44 |
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Corbyn's big mistake (and that's because he's the person he is) was to try to work with them, thinking they were acting in good faith when of course they weren't. He should have done what all the papers were accusing him of anyway and done whatever was in his power to get shut of them. not playing for keeps is what doomed both bernie and corbyn because their enemies absolutely were. you don't bring a knife to a gunfight
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2021 03:06
|
|