|
keep punching joe posted:Show yourself coward! jBrereton (MP) hasn't been posting in a while  E: 44, "droopy drawers", when you poo poo yourself at the bingo
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
radmonger posted:While there is that, I almost suspect some people in this thread have inside knowledge that someone in Corbyn’s inner circle took Putin’s money in return for deliberately tanking the 2019 election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:12
|
|
|
This argument feels like a microcosm of the left’s tendencies to paralyse progress through the incessant critique of each other on the nuances (the thing you argue isn’t written the way I believe it should be written!) whilst still agreeing about the most macro thing (capitalist greed is bad and destroys society!) Deliberate foreign financially-leveraged interference in our country is bad because is panders to elite libertarians/capitalists who are easy prey for destabilising actors. A weaponised class system that systemically empowers that elite is also a bad thing. A press system that’s ripe for exploitation either through home-grown bigotry or ownership by people with demonstrable foreign investments in destabilisation of a European power is also very much a bad thing. All of these things can (and are) true. They have interdependent causalities. People like Cadwalladr might be overstating deliberate, planned Russian interference. She might not be. It’s difficult for any of us to know. But going No True Scotsman on it all isn’t always helpful—and ultimately it’s off putting for people to be told that their introductions to systemic corruption are invalid because the person writing about it doesn’t conform to spurious standards about level-of-rightness. I know that this thread has a tendency for cynicism (which largely I enjoy) but god drat, it’s getting into the realms of discounting people as The Wrong Kind Of People rather than deconstructing their arguments too often for (my) comfort.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:13
|
|
|
folk such as cadwalladr and owen jones occupy niches in mainstream discourse because they do not present a threat to capital by identifying and discussing parts/actions of the machine in isolation if anything they act as a pressure relief valve where the public can see some of the obvious corruption and hypocrisy discussed and "exposed" and be rightly outraged only to be continually distracted by the next petit outrage du jour and never seek actual remedies against the system that grieves them as a whole
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:15
|
|
|
I think it's pretty off-base to conflate Cadwalladr and Owen Jones. OJ does a lot of good work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:23
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:This is how I see things. It's a very hard sell in this thread though because many people here are past thinking there's any point trying to do anything and are locked in to accelerationism and ensuing oblivion. Horse poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:23
|
|
|
I'm really glad people are stepping in on this thread who aren't completely broke brained by cynicism. We need to be screaming at the top of our lungs right loving now. We can get back to navel gazing about which particular opinions makes a given centrist Bad Actually when the only war crimes being committed aren't ones the public cares about. I promise you I hear you OwlFancier I'm with you on all of it but if A = B then A + B must be twice as bad. We HAVE to do something. The mainstream press is picking up our role in facilitating this and we HAVE to use that. Right now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:31
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:I'm really glad people are stepping in on this thread who aren't completely broke brained by cynicism. You're being really insulting right now I rewrote this post several times but decided not to say what I was originally going to say to you, because I'm trying to be nicer overall but cut this out
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:38
|
|
|
The main problem is that hyping up 'RUSSIAN MONEY!' is very unlikely to actually get any action that meaningfully harms Russian oligarchs but likely to just be immediately and completely redirected into yet more violent, hysterical xenophobia, and lead to banning borscht and beating up joggers because they wear tracksuits.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:41
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:I'm really glad people are stepping in on this thread who aren't completely broke brained by cynicism. Who is we in this instance and what are we doing? All of Twitter is posting as hard as they can about Ukraine and it doesn't seem to have solved things yet, is there also a second step in your plan for stopping Russian influences past writing Guardian articles and screaming at the top of our lungs? e: The reason I ask is that any plausible next step I can think of that would actually work to combat corruption in UK politics doesn't seem like the sort of thing Cadwalladr and her colleagues are likely to support. big scary monsters fucked around with this message at 14:52 on Mar 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:45
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:E: ^^^ so Cadwalladr should either report on all sources of political manipulation in the UK equally, or none at all? Yes, that's it, you're very smart. It's the same defence you see of Bellingcat, "oh, so just because they focus on Iraq & Syria & almost completely ignore Yemen means we should ignore them?". But really it doesn't matter because I'll just be accused of being a nihilist for not agreeing that this is any more important than other forms of corruption. Somehow going "actually I think focusing solely on Russians is at risk of blaming all our woes on foreigners and it's not like the British need an excuse to be xenophobic. That might not be your intention but throw a stone down a wintery slope and it could turn into an avalanche that wipes out a village, regardless if that was your intention. Things snowball out of control sometimes. I also worry that it gives a pass to the rich Brits causing equal damage, be they Arron Banks or the Duke of Westminster or whoever the hell else. As a socialist I think the problem is rich people, which is a category that includes wealthy Russians as well as Mohamed Al Fayed & Bernie Ecclestone to name 2 non-Russian examples from the past who were directly linked to corruption in British politics. radmonger posted:While there is that, I almost suspect some people in this thread have inside knowledge that someone in Corbyn’s inner circle took Putin’s money in return for deliberately tanking the 2019 election. That’s the only thing that can see that would would be explain the level of defensiveness on this topic, the avoidance of common sense concrete left wing arguments based on solidarity by those being shelled by the rich in favour of vague liberal whataboutery. gently caress me that is a spectacularly stupid post. On multiple levels. Probably on every level imaginable and some that are beyond human imagination and comprehension. Why would anyone here be happy to cover up for Jeremy Corbyn if he intentionally shat the election? I shat on Jeremy Corbyn for being a weak leader who ultimately was too much of an appeaser to even recreate the appeal of being one of the few sincere people at Westminster that got him the leadership originally. As an aside, it's extremely hilarious that you even consider this a possibility when Corbyn was speaking out on the risks of dirty Russian money and of Vladimir Putin from more or less the day he took office, well before Saint Carole noticed. Meanwhile Tony Blair, hero of British liberals, was declaring in 2014 to forget Ukraine so we can ally with Putin against radical Islam. But it's Corbyn who you are making up bizarre conspiracy theories about while having enough of a brass nose of accusing others of being conspiracy theorists on this! Belter. Honestly, liberals are utterly demented in their obsession with Corbyn. He's irrelevant, even his fellow Labour left MPs have shown impressively little solidarity with him, your side won, but that's not enough, he must be slurred and fully crushed so no one ever again has the gall to be a socialist Labour leader.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:51
|
|
|
Jeherrin posted:This argument feels like a microcosm of the left’s tendencies to paralyse progress through the incessant critique of each other on the nuances (the thing you argue isn’t written the way I believe it should be written!) whilst still agreeing about the most macro thing (capitalist greed is bad and destroys society!) Good post this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:52
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:As a socialist I think the problem is rich people, which is a category that includes wealthy Russians as well as Mohamed Al Fayed & Bernie Ecclestone to name 2 non-Russian examples from the past who were directly linked to corruption in British politics. We are at an almost unique moment where people might actually care. big scary monsters posted:Who is we in this instance and what are we doing? All of Twitter is posting as hard as they can about Ukraine and it doesn't seem to have solved things yet, is there also a second step in your plan for stopping Russian influences past writing Guardian articles and screaming at the top of our lungs? 1) these cunts took Russian money leading to war crimes on your TVs 2) look who else they took money from and the poo poo they do serious gaylord posted:Good post this. huge agree
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 14:57
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:gently caress me that is a spectacularly stupid post. It was clearly satire if you actually read what they were saying. Most people got it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:00
|
|
|
Borrovan posted:In my opinion the fact that lots of people & groups interfere with our lovely democracy is not a valid reason not to pay attention when Russia does it There's not much point pointing out all the law-breaking going on when there's no punishment for breaking the law or any effort to enforce the law in the first place. E: To be clear, we need to be doing both pointing out the law-breaking and fixing the system that enforces the laws, but I think we need to prioritise fixing the system over any specific instance. TACD fucked around with this message at 15:04 on Mar 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:02
|
|
|
TACD posted:I agree, but it's also putting the cart before the horse. We can have all the proof in the world that our democracy is being undermined by foreign money, but it does no good so long as we don't have a culture of actually holding people to account and making changes. In terms of prioritisation, an argument could be made that pointing out specific instances is important because it’s a means of galvanising a largely ground-down voting base to actually care enough to vote for people who won’t perpetuate it—or even stand themselves if those people can’t be found.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:09
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:It was clearly satire if you actually read what they were saying. Most people got it. It was also very stupid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:09
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:It was clearly satire if you actually read what they were saying. Most people got it. It's radmonger, no way I'm not taking that at face value. When you've a history of posting the most liberal brainworm inspired rot & then you post some peak liberal brainworm rot I'm taking it sincerely. I get that's hyperbolic & all that but it's still loving deranged how much liberals are obsessed with the bloke who thinks war is bad & so is poverty. jiggerypokery posted:We are at an almost unique moment where people might actually care. How many times has taking xenophobia & turning it to a positive outcome actually worked? I'm not aware of many which I hope explains some of my scepticism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:12
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:How many times has taking xenophobia & turning it to a positive outcome actually worked? I'm not aware of many which I hope explains some of my scepticism. If the left can push "Putin regime" instead of "Russian" money as the language being used, that would be one good thing we could do. There's a lot we can do to shape the discourse right now. Way more than I can think of. We have to agree it's worth doing though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:20
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:We are at an almost unique moment where people might actually care. I don't have anything in particular against revealing Russian corruption of UK politics - it's even good! Likewise, if you want to seize some mansions and freeze some bank accounts and football clubs belonging to Russian billionaires, great, gently caress 'em. Where I differ is that I don't think this is the first step in a campaign against corruption and billionaires. To me it looks like straightforward opportunism - all things Russian are currently unpopular and politically vulnerable, so if you're a politician with obligations to certain Russians, now is a great time to get out from under them. Likewise if you're a non-Russian billionaire who considers them a rival to your own influence over British media and politics, now is a perfect time to try and push them out, and maybe even pick up some luxury properties in London on the cheap. But that's as far as it goes - get rid of some Russian billionaires and maybe their closest political allies. And nobody else. If you want to go after the rest, well, your options are exactly the same as they always were and you won't get any more support from the media and political classes than you ever did previously.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:23
|
|
|
jiggerypokery posted:If the left can push "Putin regime" instead of "Russian" money as the language being used, that would be one good thing we could do. ahahahaha, yeah, that's not gonna work mate that's never worked
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:23
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:ahahahaha, yeah, that's not gonna work mate that's never worked If i had been doing that from the start we might have avoided about a page of stupid arguing ITT.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:24
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:I also worry that it gives a pass to the rich Brits causing equal damage, be they Arron Banks I really don't think you need to worry about Caroline Cadwalladra giving a free pass to Arron Banks
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:24
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Yes, that's it, you're very smart. So… the first part of your post is unironic or what? Because you are literally saying that the argument that you shouldn’t ignore everything someone says just because they have a particular focus is wrong, meaning by process of elimination that you either have equal focus on everything, or don’t do anything at all. Like the answer to that last bit is just so obviously ‘no, of course not’ but you seem to disagree? Genuinely baffled at this E: also Jeherrin you should post more that was a good post
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:26
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:It's radmonger, no way I'm not taking that at face value. When you've a history of posting the most liberal brainworm inspired rot & then you post some peak liberal brainworm rot I'm taking it sincerely. Given your demonstrated inability to understand that post, what makes you think you correctly read the others that gave you that opinion? I’m not literally the leftiest person in existence, but ‘liberal’ is a pure white noise insult that Is so obviously wrong I don’t even feel the need to argue against it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:33
|
|
|
I can't believe that basic rear end "don't get hyper focused on ethnicity rather than capital" is such a hard thought to parse. Russian disinformation's effect on public life is negligible at best. Your Granny seeing Facebook posts about how Angela Merkel is going to arm all the Muslims has less of an impact than the BBC bringing on Daily Express journalists saying the same thing. Carol Cadwaller's journalism is good for finding out what a select group of money grubbing con men are up to but her analysis is worth gently caress all when her focus is on Russia being a unique destabilising force in the world rather than just another dick at the gangbang of capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:45
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:Russian disinformation's effect on public life is negligible at best. Source?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:47
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:
Assuming a scenario where people were sufficiently mobilised to get rid of russian financial interference in politics as "step 1", if Cadwalladr et al didn't support going further then who cares what they think, frankly. The problem is systemic and the right solution will involve changing the system rather than singling out one bad actor (Russian oligarchy). Leaving a power vacuum for british/american/whoever toffs to sweep back in after and do the same thing is absolutely a problem that would need tackling alongside what she's talking about and she may or may not be up for that. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do the thing with regards to Russian money now while there's support we could capture to build an argument for going further off the back of. While we're not having those arguments, we're leaving the door open for the right to either try and hush the whole thing up because they're on the payroll, or they're on the payroll of someone else. Or, to say "the problem was only Russia and we've fixed that now so everything's fine". Or "look, the left don't want to get rid of Russian money, I wonder why, knowhatimean?" and while that's a loving stupid line it's absolutely one they're already trotting out. I dunno, maybe I'm having a liberal, incrementalist moment here, I agree there's a way bigger more obvious problem than Russia in terms of money in politics I just don't see the argument for not going in on that part of the solution. Surely it helps, a bit?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:47
|
|
|
Isomermaid posted:Assuming a scenario where people were sufficiently mobilised to get rid of russian financial interference in politics as "step 1", if Cadwalladr et al didn't support going further then who cares what they think, frankly. The problem is systemic and the right solution will involve changing the system rather than singling out one bad actor (Russian oligarchy). Leaving a power vacuum for british/american/whoever toffs to sweep back in after and do the same thing is absolutely a problem that would need tackling alongside what she's talking about and she may or may not be up for that. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do the thing with regards to Russian money now while there's support we could capture to build an argument for going further off the back of. Exactly this. The left are great at totally failing to seize a very loving obvious moment. Jakabite fucked around with this message at 16:06 on Mar 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
I think stuff gets read in this thread a lot for being something it's not. I wasn't saying "don't investigate malign influences of Russian money" I'm saying "Do that, but also if we're acknowledging that Russian money is a problem now, we should also be acknowledging that ALL big money is a problem and working to curb those influences". Like if Russia detached from the earth and flew off into space with all the Russian oligarchs, the British establishment would immediately be cosying up to, I don't know, Chinese billionaires? The Saudis even more? American evangelical interests? Who knows. The point is that removing Russian influence while not dealing with anything else ultimately solves nothing. That's not saying "We should not be dealing with undue political influence from Russians". I don't think anyone is saying that? It's just that to do so only tackles part of the problem. It's similar to everybody making out like Trump was this huge problem and once he was out of office things would be much better for the American people. Like, yes, get the guy out of office, but he's only there in the first place because things are severely hosed and if you don't tackle the conditions that got him there then you aren't fixing anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:54
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:Source? Its more up to yourself to prove that it does. Not seen a single piece of evidence that Russian disinformation's had an impact that couldn't be explained by literally everything else in British mainstream press and media.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 15:55
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:I think stuff gets read in this thread a lot for being something it's not. I think it's hard to take anything else from the initial points made by some. Characterising the journalist responsible for a lot of this digging as a liberal Russia-brained hack doesn't say to me that the person doing that cares about Russian influence, but also wants more people taking a closer look at other billionaires and world powers. There's nothing wrong with having a specific focus to what you choose to investigate. Edit: ^^ would it be too cheeky to link one of Cadwalladr's articles on this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:05
|
|
|
It'd be very dumb considering I've already told you my opinion on why her analysis is worth dick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:12
|
|
|
Isomermaid posted:I dunno, maybe I'm having a liberal, incrementalist moment here, I agree there's a way bigger more obvious problem than Russia in terms of money in politics I just don't see the argument for not going in on that part of the solution. Surely it helps, a bit? The left should broadly support running oligarchs of all stripes out of town, but there's no clear route from "Putin's doing a bad war therefore" to "Leveson 2 needs to happen" or whatever and the people administering the running oligarchs out of town, however reluctantly, will not permit one to emerge. At the same time, stoking nationalist sentiment against a foreign aggressor is a right-wing wet dream that will inevitably be used to purge the left as we saw in the opening days of the war. Imo a big problem the left in the UK has post-Corbyn is the loss of that platform to introduce left-wing positions into the national media, even if it was as a target of constant ridicule. As with Skripal, a Corbyn-like figure could at least voice a moderate opinion which made sense that would get published in a hundred "look at this idiot" stories. In that absence, we're stuck with either crank opinions that get promoted to hurt the left, or endorsing someone like Cadwalladr who is superficially aligned with some of the goals of the left but is not and will not be a friend of the left.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
To be fair what I've seen from Cadwalladr does indicate to me that she's completely blind to the larger systemic issues.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:14
|
|
|
Jakabite posted:Exactly this. The left are great at totally failing to seize a very loving obvious moment. Not all of them: https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1503371509536014345
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:15
|
|
|
Comrade Fakename posted:Not all of them: Absolutely true, legends
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:18
|
|
|
radmonger posted:Given your demonstrated inability to understand that post, what makes you think you correctly read the others that gave you that opinion? I called you a liberal because every post of yours I've read over the years in these UKMT threads gave me the impression that you are a liberal. Are you saying you don't support the continued existence of the free market? Apologies if so. Then again, you're the guy who responded to this paragraph from a Spectator column by Boris Johnson quote:Looking at the diverse wedding crowd, and thinking of this planet’s multicultural future, I have been brooding about carrots. It is a fact that the British carrot used to be white. It was a pale, delicate, Anglo-Saxon root. As anyone who has eaten Indian carrot halva will know, Indian carrots are red, the colour of blood oranges. It probably follows that at some stage the dark red carrots of the subcontinent cross-fertilised with our indigenous carrots, to produce the modern orange cross. Yes, folks, the next time you chomp on a carrot, reflect that it is a half-caste. It is the result of rampant miscegenation. Look at the modern British carrot, and you behold the future of the human race. with the Galaxy Brain take that "he's clearly arguing that miscegenation is a good thing" as if anyone who have ever ranted about "miscegenation" has ever thought it was a positive. So I'm probably wasting my time. Anyway, reading a bit of that thread was a horrible mistake because now I just feel depressed remembering a time before the leader of the opposition was utterly worthless & there was at least a vague prospect of something better being possible in my lifetime. Ho hum. Also, people squatting in billionaires empty properties are absolutely & always to be commended. Even though it's obvious that yes the police will evict them because nothing is more important to their job than enforcing property rights still the right thing to do entirely. forkboy84 fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Mar 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:19
|
|
|
Comrade Fakename posted:Not all of them: if you listen to radio war nerd you’d know the astonishing fact that sanctions on this guy would increase the cost of every can of coke in the US by 15 cents, he’s a big fish
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 16:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
forkboy84 posted:I called you a liberal because every post of yours I've read over the years in these UKMT threads gave me the impression that you are a liberal. Are you saying you don't support the continued existence of the free market? Apologies if so. I suppose I’m probably cautiously in favour of the recent reforms in Cuba that permitted the existence of family owned resteraunts and so on. Does that count? As I said, I don’t claim to be the leftiest person in the world. I generally think the rules of society should be collectively set by the people, ideally peacefully. I don’t particularly buy the idea, shared by liberals and communists, that there is some form of metaphysical true knowledge of what the right rules _should be_ that overrides that process. As for the BJ quote, you might think it is factually wrong, or perhaps correct but unwise to say out loud because those misreading it vote. But what possible mental process would lead you to come to the conclusion that it represents a _liberal_ position?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2022 17:03
|
|