|
Guavanaut posted:What's the opposite of libel where you make up unrealistically charitable statements about others? lebil?
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 05:09 |
|
|
lebil E: ^ 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 21:49
|
|
|
Gonna start posting lebillous tweets that Andrew Neil romanced that Thai teenager (who was defiyan adult) using his masculine charm and sparkling wit
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 21:54
|
|
|
Interesting thing with George Monbiot going on on twitter: https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/1467597988906385409?s=20 https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/1467598401084837889?s=20 These are from a big thread he's posted about "the problem with the left/Corbyn supporters". Now, I follow George because I think he's generally a good egg and does sometimes post some good stuff about climate change etc. and has even a few times stretched to writing some vaguely anti-capitalist stuff. However... This whole thing has made me realise a few things and I'd like to lay them out: Liberals like George have a very shallow conception of politics. Now a liberal would try to say that they don't - they're just sensible, they have common sense, they're the grown-ups in the room, etc. and all those other fart noises we've heard a million times. How can we say with absolute confidence that they have a shallow understanding of things? Because if they didn't, they'd see the full magnitude of the problem and realise that anything short of *radical* change to the political structures in the UK (and more broadly in the West) won't make the slightest dent in living conditions or climate change or racism or any of the other catastrophic problems facing us. Now I don't know much about Jackie Walker - I used to follow her but unfollowed her for some reason I can't remember... but George is claiming that she's calling him an evil traitor here, when all she's really done is point out a large blind spot. Anybody in this thread knows what a Soft Tory Nandy is, so if you say that you like Nandy that is *very* revealing as a massive blind spot, either in your knowledge about Nandy herself (in which case, why are you saying she's your favourite? Is this how you treat all of your politics? With only a surface-level analysis?) OR about the nature of the entire political system we have in front of us. Another reason I can say with a very high level of confidence that it mainly stems from a very shallow conception of politics is because *that used to be me*. I always always knew that the Tories were total cunts and that we needed rid of them, I always knew I didn't like Blair and his cronies even if I couldn't elucidate why that was, but having heard general descriptions of what liberals believed - the socially liberal stuff that is, I thought "Yeah, that describes me, I want (for example) gay people to have equal rights", but I'd never really put the effort in to fully understand the magnitude of the changes required (i.e. the dismantling of existing power structures and at least very serious curbing if not outright abolition of capitalism) to achieve that kind of equality. I used to think that getting the Tories out was the best we could ever hope for (and of course sadly, if everybody believes that, then they're right), and therefore I was an advocate of the sort of "red team/blue team" politics that Libs like Monbiot believe in. Once you've got this view of politics, you see yourself as "on the left" because as far as you're concerned, being anti-Tory is enough. You want the boys in red to lead. They'll do things that aren't Tory things because by definition they're not part of the Tory party. "I want the blue team out of office therefore I'm just as left-wing as all of these 'puritanical leftists' who cruelly ridicule me for saying that I like Lisa Nandy'". And what's worse is that this viewpoint of the sensible centrist is what's always pushed by the media, by the educational system etc. - I was literally taught that horseshoe theory was fact at school as part of the history corriculum. Here's the left and here's the right and if you go too far to the left you literally become Hitler, and all the sensible serious men in suits are here broadly in the centre. So when the (actual) left says things which centrists call "purity tests", mostly they're just saying "Hang on, we should be wary of listening to this person, I don't think they understand the systemic nature of the problems we're facing and therefore we can't trust their conclusions, even if they are mostly a 'good egg'", but the problem is that convincing a convicted centrist (and after all, aren't they all? Another symptom of this liberalism is the thought process that means that they're in the right about all of it even though they're really quite ignorant) that they need to completely reconceptualise their understanding of political systems and the establishment, from the ground up, is not at all easy - because that kind of thought requires levels of effort that they've already shown they're not inclined to put in. I think it would be more helpful from the left if we tried more to say "I think you should look at your understanding of things" rather than "haha look at this Nandy liker, what a rube" BUT the problem is that so often when you try the first approach, it's met with a load of sneering centrist fart-huffing from the likes of David Baddiel, it becomes immensely loving tiring to try and keep it up. Like, sometimes I wonder "Is it me who's wrong about this stuff?" but I always come to the conclusion that it was me accepting that I was wrong and uninformed about things previously which led to me becoming a "real" leftist (with the help of this thread), and it's definitely a lack of that, and a healthy dose of either (often willful) ignorance and/or massive amounts of cognitive dissonance which allows people to remain as liberals.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 21:54
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:And what's worse is that this viewpoint of the sensible centrist is what's always pushed by the media, by the educational system etc. - I was literally taught that horseshoe theory was fact at school as part of the history corriculum. Here's the left and here's the right and if you go too far to the left you literally become Hitler, and all the sensible serious men in suits are here broadly in the centre. Yep. This was basically the only thing I was taught about party politics in my formative years. I think it was literally just 'both Hitler and Stalin were basically the same, look at this horseshoe'. This poo poo stuck with me though and I fully believed it until probably my early 20s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:01
|
|
|
fuctifino posted:https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1467932009376985095 How odd, I thought the Spectator loved Free Speech.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
OK, but, https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/status/1467599111906017287 Is this not reasonable?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:11
|
|
|
stev posted:Yep. This was basically the only thing I was taught about party politics in my formative years. I think it was literally just 'both Hitler and Stalin were basically the same, look at this horseshoe'. This poo poo stuck with me though and I fully believed it until probably my early 20s. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:12
|
|
|
I've written up my complaint to the Halifax about them cutting off my travel credit card without notification, their contact page offers a phone number or under "Other ways to complain" I can fill it a web form which has the warning that they are prioritizing vulnerable customers and it can take up to 1-8 weeks. Is there a disadvantage to complaining over the phone? They seem to prefer I'd phone, which makes me think I should fill in the form, or will it just be quicker to call?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:26
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1467961061076832263 https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1467962502197624833
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:28
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:George Monbiot George Monbiot is very good at diagnosing problems, but his solution is usually to launch a strongly-worded petition
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:28
|
|
|
Dabir posted:OK, but, Well, is it true/accurate? He's said in that thread, in the same vein, that a number of Corbyn supporters are demanding absolute unconditional support of Corbyn - this is not something I've seen. It's an accusation I've seen levelled, from centrist liberals, but I don't think it's true. Again IMO it still boils down to Monbiot thinking some level of "I've done some work for Corbyn for god's sake! I'm just as left-wing as anybody!", and people on the left going "Well you can't be that left-wing if you think Lisa Nandy is any good". FWIW I don't think that Monbiot is actively "Anti-Corbyn", I just think that his understanding of the problems we face isn't sufficient that we can always trust his conclusions. As anybody with some level of knowledge about a subject can, even in some cases more often than not, come to the right answers, without knowledge that they *fully* understand the issues, we shouldn't give them unconditional support... which is ironic because that's what he seems to be asking for whilst also claiming that it's a failing of "the puritanical left". And ultimately: Noxville posted:George Monbiot is very good at diagnosing problems, but his solution is usually to launch a strongly-worded petition This is it. And it's another thing that marks George as somebody who basically has his heart in the right place but who doesn't appreciate the magnitude of the problems we face. Another problem with that is that until you fully understand the problems you're still vulnerable to being pulled strongly in completely the wrong direction by believing in someone like Nandy, or any other Soft Tory in a Nice Suit. WhatEvil fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Dec 6, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:37
|
|
|
I still think Nandy would have made a better leader than Starmer, but Michael Gove would have probably made a better labour leader than Starmer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:40
|
|
|
Oh yeah I agree, Nandy probably wouldn't have been so terrible as Starmer, but that's not a very high bar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:43
|
|
|
It's yet more "unity is when nobody is telling me I'm wrong" from a Twitter blue-tick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:43
|
|
|
but they're not telling him hes wrong, they're pointing to some trivial quote and saying thats why you shouldn't listen to him
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:51
|
|
|
I think it's a bit harsh to categorise Monbiot the same as typical liberals though, he has written a lot about the need for radical and immediate change to avert a climate crisis, and he lays the blame for those issues squarely on capitalism. It's a fair point that he doesn't offer much in the way of a realistic alternative, but I think he'll get there eventually. For example, he's written about why he's not opposed to nuclear power despite being an environmentalist, because he knows it's difficult to actually get fossil fuels removed from the system otherwise. He tried to make a citizen's arrest of John Bolton for war crimes as well, which is the kind of thing that only a middle class white man can do but at the same time is at least more than your standard hand wringing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 22:51
|
|
|
If we're going to go in two footed on Monbiot, can we do the same with everyone in this thread that voted Lib Dem in 2010 or voted for Starmer in last years leadership election? Just screenshot their post saying that they and reply to everyone of their posts with that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Convex posted:Weren't there quite a few people on those lists from going to charity events or something, or is everybody suspect? I haven't been following the case so outside of the big names (Clinton, Spacey etc.) am unsure whether anything new came to light recently. Yeah, the black book is pretty much anyone who attended a society event in New York in the 90s and early 00s - while that alone *does* make you suspect of many things, it's not evidence of involvement in anything that Epstein (or Maxwell) were arrested over. Now the flight logs, there's a very, very different matter. At the very least anyone who flew on that plane, especially to Little St. James, is deeply, deeply dodgy. Anyone who did it *twice* - because I'll give the benefit of the doubt to people like Matt Groening who went once, were deeply, deeply weirded out by it and never spoke to Epstein again - should be sweating like Prince Andrew doesn't as this trial goes on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:18
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:What's the opposite of libel where you make up unrealistically charitable statements about others? Political journalism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Trickjaw posted:God, 'The Road To Wigan Pier' is hard going. Good old Blair treating the working class as if they're in his own little petri dish, even though he is wishy washily empathic. Oh, and in mortal fear of sharing a bottle with low men. I thought the bit at the end about automation was eerily prescient.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:21
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Gonna start posting lebillous tweets that Andrew Neil romanced that Thai teenager (who was defiyan adult) using his masculine charm and sparkling wit If you mean the one in that pic that Private Eye like to print to wind him up, she's African-American and definitely of age, but IIRC *is* very tangentially related to both Epstein and Marc Brunel (the photographer who was another feeder of girls to Epstein, not the bloke who designed the Thames Tunnel and sired Isambard).
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
What do you think the tunnel was really for 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:30
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:What do you think the tunnel was really for It was Victorian London, rich people didn't have to hide what they were up to, they'd get people to paint loving pictures of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:32
|
|
|
Gorn Myson posted:If we're going to go in two footed on Monbiot, can we do the same with everyone in this thread that voted Lib Dem in 2010 or voted for Starmer in last years leadership election? Many people itt were dumb babies voting in their first election in 2010 and were excited to be rid of New Labour. Naive but excusable imo. Anyone who voted Starmer, though? Gulag is too good for 'em.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
People in this thread also aren't getting paid to go on TV or write columns in the Guardian. Our bad choices do a lot less damage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:49
|
|
|
Gorn Myson posted:If we're going to go in two footed on Monbiot, can we do the same with everyone in this thread that voted Lib Dem in 2010 or voted for Starmer in last years leadership election? If they haven't since gained a greater understanding of the world around them then yes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:55
|
|
|
Tarnop posted:People in this thread also aren't getting paid to go on TV or write columns in the Guardian. Our bad choices do a lot less damage. People in this thread did vote for Starmer though. And I don't judge them for it either (unless they're still gung-ho for him) because I get why they did that at the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:57
|
|
|
Dudes job is literally to understand politics and he thought Nandy was a good choice for leader. Come the gently caress on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Dudes job is literally to understand politics and he thought Nandy was a good choice for leader. Come the gently caress on. This is my issue. He isn’t some random guy, his whole thing is he knows what’s going on. So you either write him off as a liberal, or you write him off as incompetent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:00
|
|
|
Actually it's a Euler diagram.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:02
|
|
|
But anyway I wouldn't say I'm "going too footed" on him, I did say that he was a good egg, just that he doesn't fully grasp the magnitude of the problems and remembering that gives us a better understanding of how he might land at the conclusions he lands at, which I think is useful. I've also said I think he often ends up at or near the "right" answer despite his shortcomings.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:03
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Dudes job is literally to understand politics and he thought Nandy was a good choice for leader. Come the gently caress on. Well the choice was pretty terrible. I went RLB as a sort of 'continuity Corbyn' even though I wasn't over-impressed. If it had been Nandy v Starmer I would have gone Nandy. No way was I voting Starmer. I heard rather a lot of disparaging remarks about RLB amongst Labour members before the voting that 'she looks like someone who works behind the makeup counter at Boots not a party leader'. However, as all 3 candidates signed up to the BoD pledges I was pretty disgusted with all of them. Re Monbiot: On the whole I see him similarly to some of my friends who are on healthy incomes in IT or hospital docs but are essentially caring 'soft socialist' types. The mistake they make is to think reading the Guardian (and - worse - believing it as some great bastion of truth) makes them 'left wing'. Jaeluni Asjil fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Dec 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:03
|
|
|
Gorn Myson posted:The damage in this case being Lisa Nandy not being elected leader of Labour and being an unknown quantity to the vast majority of people in the country. All because of a response to a question that he admits was thoughtless because he hadn't followed the contest because he wasn't a member of the party. Starmer won the election by a greater margin than the number of people who have ever posted in the UKMT. We could all never vote in an election again and the chances are it would make no difference. That's how liberal democracy works. The political establishment in this country, meanwhile, runs on a constant self-propelling network of MPs and journalists constantly telling people that other MPs and journalists are good and correct and not the soulless loving monsters that they actually are. That poo poo slowly layers up in people's brains, conditioning them to treat these idiots as their betters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:09
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:'she looks like someone who works behind the makeup counter at Boots not a party leader'. Dear christ
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:15
|
|
|
Don't want some dolly bird telling me what to do, only men who look like they suddenly become experts in Rugby Union and BMW engine maintenance after their fifth pint of mild.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
peanut- posted:Doesn’t she live in the US? I thought the US tells the UK to gently caress right off with any and all libel judgements. I think he'd have to sue in the US, not sure what happens then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:31
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Dudes job is literally to understand politics and he thought Nandy was a good choice for leader. Come the gently caress on. The Monbiot stuff is just pure Twitter drama. Permanently online leftists trying to dunk on him with that screenshot got a detailed response from him that said leftists are hosed off with. Its utterly meaningless and it changes nothing. If I wanted to rage at a liberal pretending to be a leftist, I'd go after James O'Brian first, partly because JOB is a evidently a huge oval office, but also because Monbiot legitimately does seem to be pushing further and further left as he ages. Plus that video he did about introducing wolves at Yellowstone owns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:48
|
|
|
we regret to inform you the funny images app is turning your images into NFTs https://twitter.com/LemmaEOF/status/1466950098030530562?s=20
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 05:09 |
|
|
They could do that automatically with procedurally generated input strings too though, so I can't really care that much that my works of zero effort art are being turned into tulip bulbs for crypto idiots. Except this one. This is my fungicide tolkien 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2021 01:05
|
|