|
https://twitter.com/martinmckee/status/1468613444463120385
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:10 |
|
|
Is this the new scheme where promising young students are arrested and hounded to suicide by the British state?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:29
|
|
|
Hopefully this scheme lets young people contribute scientifically to the deaths of as many Nazis as possible And that the young people are able to define 'Nazi' as widely as they see fit
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:33
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:I'm not voting Labour. I think that if you do you're legitimising Keith.. He's not going to get in, and the wider margin he crashes and burns by, the better. I haven't decided what I'm actually going to do yet but I'm increasingly of the opinion that a narrow Labour win under Starmer would be the absolute worst long-term result. On a scale of most to least likely I have: 1. Tory win: Nothing changes. Labour make noises about Corbyn. Humiliating, but probably not sufficiently to cause any major internal upsets. Same old same old, maybe a small chance that the left gets its act together (lol). 2. Tory landslide: Nothing changes. Labour make noises about Corbyn, but the humiliating scale of the defeat leaves some real room for a left counteroffensive. 3. Labour win: Yay, Labour wins. Very little changes. Labour proceeds to wax lyrical about the power of sensible grown up politics, proceeds to implement Tory-lite policies. Maybe they use PFI to open a few Sure Start centres. They lose at the next election, obviously, and nothing changes, but the awful leadership is completely secure for a good while as the first to win an election in over a decade. 4. Labour landslide: Very little changes immediately (see above), but the scale of the victory, maybe, just maybe, encourage a few bolder policies that actually benefit society.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:39
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:From poster on reddit: That's a lot of Tories in the Don't Know box who'll probably go back. Or maybe not, but it's definitely a very soft lead for Labour as it stands.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
I will vote for either Greens or SNP in the next general, and if I go SNP it's out of respect for my MP getting blootered on that flight to Gibraltar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
Not voting Labour, gently caress that. Has anyone dealt with the London Congestion charge lately? I've just been stung because I didn't know it applied to weekends now, is that grounds for appeal?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:48
|
|
|
I will never understand why anyone drives through London unless their job relies on it
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:52
|
|
|
Has ignorance of the law ever worked for an appeal?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:52
|
|
|
lol https://twitter.com/owenjones84/status/1468715585064345605 Check the thread for a bunch more evidence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:03
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:4. Labour landslide: Very little changes immediately (see above), but the scale of the victory, maybe, just maybe, encourage a few bolder policies that actually benefit society. On the other hand: 1997.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:07
|
|
|
Wondering how the various hung parliament options fit in. I put Lab/Tory coalition between 3 & 4
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:11
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:I will never understand why anyone drives through London unless their job relies on it Well I tried driving through Glasgow to get home but that just made things worse. (While I wouldn't want to do it regularly, driving through London is fine as long as you're zen about things - Birmingham is *way* more stressful to drive through IMO)
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:12
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Well I tried driving through Glasgow to get home but that just made things worse. Glasgow City centre is definitely not designed for unfamiliar drivers. It's all just one-way streets kicking you in the teeth for coming off the motorway TBH it rules.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:24
|
|
|
When a party tells me not to vote for them, I'm happy to oblige https://twitter.com/ofthesparrows/status/1462757038933557251
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:26
|
|
|
When did "the welfare state" stop meaning cradle to grave care that delivers a positive social and economic benefit in the kind of paternalist Bismarckian manner and start meaning the bad lazy proles, and was it before or after "benefits" stopped meaning pensions and unemployment insurance and social assistance and started meaning bad thing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:43
|
|
|
“No policies, just vibes” has some upsides: https://twitter.com/populismupdates/status/1468637127206260740
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:49
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Has ignorance of the law ever worked for an appeal? Point is that I was aware of the charge but not the arbitrary change to it, it used to not apply at weekends and I never heard of that changing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 01:50
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:When did "the welfare state" stop meaning cradle to grave care that delivers a positive social and economic benefit in the kind of paternalist Bismarckian manner and start meaning the bad lazy proles, and was it before or after "benefits" stopped meaning pensions and unemployment insurance and social assistance and started meaning bad thing? it was around when middle class people started worrying about chavs iirc
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 02:06
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:When did "the welfare state" stop meaning cradle to grave care that delivers a positive social and economic benefit in the kind of paternalist Bismarckian manner and start meaning the bad lazy proles, and was it before or after "benefits" stopped meaning pensions and unemployment insurance and social assistance and started meaning bad thing? Probably about 1979. BizarroAzrael posted:Point is that I was aware of the charge but not the arbitrary change to it, it used to not apply at weekends and I never heard of that changing. Yeah, but they apparently brought in Sunday charges in June 2020. I'm just skeptical that "I didn't know" but if appeals cost nothing then it's up to you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 02:08
|
|
|
Convex posted:it was around when middle class people started worrying about chavs iirc I encourage anyone who might have forgotten to go watch some old early-mid 2000s 'documentaries' because wow the sheer hatred we had towards fat people and poor people and especially fat poor people was something to behold. Like obviously we still do but we properly used to revel in it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 03:23
|
|
|
Little Britain is so emblematic of the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 04:37
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Has ignorance of the law ever worked for an appeal? Ignorance of the law only works as a defense in some very specific circumstances, and I don't actually know if that's even true in the UK at all. I know in the US it can work but only if the stars align because it needs to be something A) Recently made illegal so you can credibly claim to have not heard about it B) Not well-publicized as a change in the law so you can claim to not have heard about it (And the retort "This law was passed through a public, elected, deliberative body" is taken by the courts to be pretty ironclad) and typically C) It's something that is legal in other jurisdictions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 07:29
|
|
|
A exploration of that exact question: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/109878/1/Hudson_Lunt_et_al_2016b.pdf The sense is that the turning point was in the 1960s, rather than the 1970s, which comports with other contemporaneous trends (the shutdown of Commonwealth migration, the triumph of the New Left over the vanguardist old left reflecting the rise of social issues politics, the disillusionment with the new protest politics). If anything the later Thatcher period of the 1980s features a softening of attitudes which then hardens again during the 1990s. quote:Seabrook (2016) even goes so far as to suggest that the UK’s political left, once scornful of a perspective deemed deeply conservative, is now rooted in a nostalgic view of the pre-Thatcher period. (cough) A take from the conclusion, worth scratching one's chin about : quote:None of this is to challenge the veracity of arguments about the often hostile nature of contemporary debates. Instead, we argue that if, within the complex and at times contradictory bundle of attitudes that make up ‘public opinion’, widespread pejorative attitudes to welfare were present during the golden era of welfare state expansion then it suggests that the existence of similar views today need not be a barrier to expanding social policy provision today.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 07:52
|
|
|
Essentially it's the difference between Starmer saying "The people won't like it so we're not going to do it" and Corbyn saying "The people may not like it so it's our job to advocate for why it's a good thing."WhatEvil posted:I'm not voting Labour. I think that if you do you're legitimising Keith.. He's not going to get in, and the wider margin he crashes and burns by, the better. You're talking about sending a message to a party that is stood there with it's fingers in its ears going "Lalala, electorability sensible business focussed middle ground lalala" while SPADS pull lib-dem level stat-bending to convince their idiot MPs that punitive austerity is what people really want. Meanwhile every missing vote is a proportional boost to the Tories. I hate that it's that way. I don't think there's anything else in my life that will make me feel as sad / angry as what they did to the Corbyn / Momentum movement. I do not want to vote for Labour now. But I do want to vote against the Tories and Lib Dems, and the best way to do that with all the current fuckery and norms is sadly Labour. Everything is hosed right now. There are no perfect or even good enough choices. Tactical voting sites disproportionately say to vote Lib Dem based on one Guardian article by an ex lib dem (I wrote a whole thing about this but it's long and rambling and my hands are too hosed to edit the relevant bit out). A lib/lab coalition is probably the only numerically likely alternative to the Tories in this press hellscape, and it's going to be absolutely loving unbearable if it even happens. The answer is not to abstain from choosing though. We've had too many Tory governments that have slipped through on opposition doubt. I cannot afford for the benefits system to get any worse. I don't want to see the climate continue to get worse when summer is already loving unbearable. Nor do I want to see the culture war poo poo slide further into open fascism, or see the NHS get any more privatised. Absolutely yes Labour are centrist dipshits right now, but given the choice between capitulating idiots and a sociopathic kleptocrats, I'd rather try and stop the overton window getting bulldozed as far right as possible. ThomasPaine posted:Tory win: Nothing changes. If Labour get in not, much will change. If the Tories stay in it's a clear message that they can get away with whatever they like, and they'll use that mandate to push for the next level of horror, whether that's a full return to workhouses, expatriating refugees by trebuchet, or whatever return to turn-of-the-century values they're currently wanking themselves raw over. ThomasPaine posted:I encourage anyone who might have forgotten to go watch some old early-mid 2000s 'documentaries' because wow the sheer hatred we had towards fat people and poor people and especially fat poor people was something to behold. Bobby Deluxe fucked around with this message at 10:02 on Dec 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:00
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I really don't think this is true. His popularity is in the toilet right now and they're already blaming it on long-Corbyn. If it really tanks, they'll just replace him with Streeting or Reeves and the ideology will remain exactly the same - they will literally never see their tory-lite policies as the problem. Exactly why you shouldn't vote Labour - if everyone stopped voting for a party who does nothing for them they'd dissipate into nothing, leaving space for a party who will actually represent left-wing values. Their continued existence does more damage to the left than the Tories could ever hope to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:13
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:
Neither can I, which is why I won't vote for a Starmer-supporting Labour candidate*. I remember how Blair got in and instantly made punishing benefit claimants a top priority, to show how non-left he was; I think it's pretty safe to assume Keith would do the same. *I might vote for a socialist Labour candidate, depending on how resolute they'd be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:17
|
|
|
EvilHawk posted:So the Met aren't going to investigate the party due to "an absence of evidence", despite a) there literally being a video of people discussing it, one of whom resigned, and more importantly b) that's why you loving investigate you incompetent fascist pricks It literally beggers belief - I also liked the line about not taking retrospective action, so they take action against crimes before they happen??
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:37
|
|
|
at this point I'm pretty sure nothing will bring about any real change and we're up for another 20 years of Tory misrule. maybe if we're lucky, a single term of "Labour" where they don't actually do anything
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:38
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Ignorance of the law only works as a defense in some very specific circumstances, and I don't actually know if that's even true in the UK at all. I know in the US it can work but only if the stars align because it needs to be something A) Recently made illegal so you can credibly claim to have not heard about it B) Not well-publicized as a change in the law so you can claim to not have heard about it (And the retort "This law was passed through a public, elected, deliberative body" is taken by the courts to be pretty ironclad) and typically C) It's something that is legal in other jurisdictions. Never mind ignorance not being a defense, we have a law that says you must report any suspicions you have that a customer of yours was money laundering, however it is not a defense to say you were not suspicious as the test is should you have been suspicious. So you can be convicted for nt being suspicious enough that someone else was committing a crime.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:41
|
|
|
I've seen people pointing out that taking retrospective action against breaking covid regulations is probably an extremely bad precedent to set in terms of regular people being investigated in a similar fashion, in line with the general nervousness about taking a creepingly authoritarian stance on implementing covid restrictions that could easily leak into other areas of government policy. So on balance, not having a criminal investigation is probably for the best. e: points like this: https://twitter.com/MediocreDave/status/1468841071698395138 https://twitter.com/MediocreDave/status/1468849957998374912
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:41
|
|
|
Not to be too accelerationist but It seems to me that voting for a centrist, status-quo (but slightly fash) labour party is just prolonging the inevitable. Some labour voters will be placated for 4-8 years and then we're back where we started except now the police have tanks and agent Keith's put a camera in everyone's toilet. On the other hand Keith might be even more incompetent at politics than Boris or at least as incompetent but without the backing of the papers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:44
|
|
|
Yeah, 2019 and (and to a lesser extent 2017) the way the country's media and Labour MPs treated the party broke me a little. I will not vote for Labour again unless there is serious change. Labour have gone back on every pledge from Starmer's election and are continuing to go rightwards. This party does not represent me. Maybe they would not go as far right as the tories but I have not one ounce of trust that the people in charge who wrecked everything and continue to remain will not get worse. I do not wish to endorse that with my vote.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:51
|
|
|
Not sure how well “there literally is one law for us and one for you” is going to play out Lockdown law never applied to No10. Section 73 of the Public Health (Control of Disease) states that the Covid regulations, at all times, never apply to Crown Land - which includes No. 10) ✍️Steven Barrett https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/did-the-downing-street-party-break-the-law
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:53
|
|
|
More like Clown Land
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:57
|
|
|
ronya posted:A exploration of that exact question: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/109878/1/Hudson_Lunt_et_al_2016b.pdf Interesting on three counts, firstly because you can modulate almost any question with "even if it leads to higher taxes", support for reunification in Ireland goes down quite a bit if you tack on "even if it leads to higher taxes", I bet the supposed high levels of support for the monarchy in Britain would drop if you phrased it "do you support keeping a monarch as head of state, even if it leads to higher taxes" and so on. Second because those higher taxes are presented absent any macroeconomic effects, I bet "would you like a 5% hike in corporation tax?" would play differently among small business owners to "would you like a 5% hike in corporation tax if it meant an 80% chance of a 10% increase in revenue?" but taxes just go into the tax hole. (See also 'tax and spend' becoming a pejorative rather than an assumed function of state.) And third is "for the poor", as if that's a fixed group that sits there being all Dickensian and starving (or Oliverian and eating chips and widescreen televisions) rather than something that most people are only ever a bad fall or a car accident away from joining. Andoman posted:It literally beggers belief - I also liked the line about not taking retrospective action, so they take action against crimes before they happen??
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:58
|
|
|
VideoGames posted:Yeah, 2019 and (and to a lesser extent 2017) the way the country's media and Labour MPs treated the party broke me a little. I will not vote for Labour again unless there is serious change. Labour have gone back on every pledge from Starmer's election and are continuing to go rightwards. This party does not represent me. Maybe they would not go as far right as the tories but I have not one ounce of trust that the people in charge who wrecked everything and continue to remain will not get worse. I do not wish to endorse that with my vote. Yeah, same: why on earth would I vote for a party that hates me and that actively opposes all the policies that I think are important? Might do Greens next time round depending on their policy stance come the election but I'd never vote Labour again unless the whole party was broken down and rebuilt from the ground up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 10:59
|
|
|
Everyone should vote SNP imo. If it sucks, hit da bricks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 11:11
|
|
|
It's worth reminding people that the work capability assessments were invented by New Labour. They were the ones who gave ATOS the contract, and they also drew up the framework that eventually became Universal Credit. Starmer's Labour will make no difference to the poor and disadvantaged. Only work will set you free.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 11:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:10 |
|
|
Jesus, its spawned again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 11:16
|
|