|
What is the best flav... you all know what this question is: This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Labour |
|
907 | 49.92% |
| Theresa May Team (Conservative) |
|
48 | 2.64% |
| Liberal Democrats |
|
31 | 1.71% |
| UKIP |
|
13 | 0.72% |
| Plaid Cymru |
|
25 | 1.38% |
| Green |
|
22 | 1.21% |
| Scottish Socialist Party |
|
12 | 0.66% |
| Scottish Conservative Party |
|
1 | 0.06% |
| Scottish National Party |
|
59 | 3.25% |
| Some Kind of Irish Unionist |
|
4 | 0.22% |
| Alliance / Irish Nonsectarian |
|
3 | 0.17% |
| Some Kind of Irish Nationalist |
|
36 | 1.98% |
| Misc. Far Left Trots |
|
35 | 1.93% |
| Misc. Far Right Fash |
|
8 | 0.44% |
| Monster Raving Loony |
|
49 | 2.70% |
| Space Navies Party |
|
39 | 2.15% |
| Independent / Single Issue |
|
2 | 0.11% |
| Can't Vote |
|
188 | 10.35% |
| Won't Vote |
|
8 | 0.44% |
| Spoiled Ballot |
|
15 | 0.83% |
| Pissflaps |
|
312 | 17.17% |
| Total: | 1817 votes | ||
|
Wasn't there that thing about how cars with spikes on them were safer because people drove more carefully in them? The solution is a nuke that goes off on you if you try and use it.
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
I think it's perhaps unsurprising the guy called radmonger has an uncanny desire for more radiation in the world tbh
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
I cannot believe people are still running windows loving XP. Reveilled posted:It seems strange we're focusing on MAD so heavily when that doesn't seem to actually be the prevailing doctrine which small countries with nuclear arsenals actually adopt. Consider Iran, for example. Why did they want nuclear weapons? Their chief enemy during this period was the United States (also Israel), and no matter how successful their nuclear program could have been, there was absolutely no way it could have reached the point of being able to achieve MAD parity with the USA. So why we're they pursuing nuclear weapons in the first place? It seems to me that their chief concern was deterring a conventional attack through the threat of nuclear escalation. Doesn't the UK's arsenal serve a similar function, in practice? Same for North Korea (though this is functionally an escalation of it's "if attacked we'll bombard the south" policy). XMNN posted:anyway having been to Hiroshima gently caress anyone who thinks that nuclear strikes on civilian targets are any more justifiable than any other form of genocide It's not like lengthy firebombing, chemical attacks, or cutting the entire island off from the outside world and starving it out would've been massively more humane.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 12:38
|
|
|
Honestly I'm not too worried about failures in MAD, I'm more worried about misjudgements or straight-up-errors. The times we've been most at risk of the apocalypse have been when there was an erroneous readout from detection or people, lacking full context, convinced themselves they were about to die in a nuclear maelstrom. This is the big threat of a nuclear arsenal; if everyone's pointing guns at each other so they feel safe over a long enough period of time someone's going to get muscle fatigue and drop one, and so far we've been lucky enough there's not been an accidental discharge.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 12:44
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Japan was already offering to surrender, though. The myth that the bombs did it is one of the grossest murder porn instances in history. This jars with what I'm aware of, which was that motions for a conditional surrender were made in July (and were fully unrealistic, believing that the soviets were going to arrange a negotiated surrender for them when they were, in fact, mobilising to invade Manchuria). It's worth noting that even after the surrender there was an internal coup with the aim of continuing the war. Now, one of the more reasonable arguments instead is that the Soviet invasion of Manchuria was more significant than the atomic bombing, since abruptly ending up at war with the people they assumed would have their side in negotiations pretty much killed any realistic hope of a negotiated surrender with people who weren't insane death cultists, but US war plans were going down one of those three routes regardless since they were still fighting actual fascists.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Has there been any talk about trying to raise the minumum wage? Both major parties committed to at least £9 so it should be easy to pass. At the very least it would force the Tories to vote against their own manifesto. I think Labour are going for £10.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 13:00
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:Malcom was basically the hero. He was underhanded because he had to be and everyone around him was a careerist shitweasel who he had no respect for. Is The Thick Of It on iplayer or something?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:BBC's already trying its best to pre-emptively frame it as lol what how it's the house of loving commons debating a government motion how the gently caress can it not be political kustomkarkommando posted:Its a bit vague but broadly by convention it was seen that a successfully amendment should lead to a resignation, this is complicated cause traditionally the opposition would attempt to field a no confidence amendment and its successfully passage would have been a pre-FTPA no confidence motion necessitating a resignation, and the vast majority of successful amendments where of this character - however this kind of fell out of practice and now the opposition field amendments that are usually "this house regrets the speech makes no reference to policy x,y,z" (which is how all tabled amendments this year are constructed). So basically because our entire government is based around people making it up as they go along this government can just plough on for five more years stoically claiming that JC is against the national interest therefore they just have to stay? loving hell.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 12:19
|
|
that dastardly Corbyn playing politics, the monster.
|
nopantsjack posted:its just appalling political point scoring! Think of this then remember that this works because a huge number of people are convinced that government decisions don't really change anything about the world.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:eh this isn't going to last much longer after we leave the EU lol, that ones gonna be pretty clear. a scary amount of people will pretend this was because of people punishing the UK for their meaningless decision rather than because it was a stupid decision
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 12:30
|
|
|
Julio Cruz posted:I really don't think May's repeated "it's not about funding but about powers" line is going to go down well at all. Even loving morons know you can't do things with powers if you have no personnel to carry them out.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 12:35
|
|
|
communism bitch posted:Remember that there was general ridicule of this idea in this very thread not two weeks ago, and the lack of lists of missing persons and casualty estimates was put down to government ineptitude, bureaucracy, and the famously respectful restraint of our press lmao. Remember how yesterday or monday (I forget) half the press were mocking Diane Abbot for being Bad At Maths because she guesstimated "hundreds" might have died.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
Gorn Myson posted:Libertarian? Just scream "Somalia!" In response. Sure, it doesn't make much sense but gently caress it neither does the "Venezuela!" thing either. Actually Somalia is also used for left-wingers, because if you don't want a strong government it automatically means you want to be a haven for maritime piracy.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
I think the main thing to remember is that "being a tory" is not a category that selects for intelligence or internal consistency.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
BBC still reporting the pay cap may be reviewed in time for the autumn budget, which should be fantastic if the Tories really are going to do a thing they just voted down.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
The only thing I can think of is if they mean Sadiq Khan, and I'm not even sure if he was in at the time.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:yeah but you might as well not loving bother at that point. Which is exactly how it'd be seen, too. Though that might be better if we get to 22 months and do an "are you loving sure" referendum or something farcial to cap off the farce-train the entire brexit process has been. Honestly that's basically the issue; there's still too many morons who're sure that this is just some kind of growing pain. There's no point on taking any action for at least a few months because even at this point any decent argument is still being replied to with "BARMY BRUSSELS REMOANERS TALKING DOWN GRATE BRIAN" spectralent fucked around with this message at 16:06 on Jun 29, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 16:02
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:It's funny how much this thread moved towards a pro-brexit stance since the referendum. With my view of "even the libdem stance is wayy too Eurosceptic" (much as I understand the political realities of anti-immigration sentiment and Brexit happening no matter what) I feel pretty lonely here these days. Nah, it's okay, Brexit's a loving stupid idea, the wind just needs to turn on it more before it's worth fighting on in parliament. The Lib Dems can keep fighting on it, since they don't matter anyway and don't have anything else to lose.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
CoolCab posted:Tons of us think Brexit is a horrible idea that will suck tbf, it's just the alternative is worse. I've said it before, but if there was ever a population I did NOT want to teach that democracy didn't work... I'm pretty convinced it already doesn't work, tbh. I've spoken to far too many complete idiots who don't understand anything who, nonetheless, are amazingly consistent voters, to think that it's a decent system of government. A random sample of complaints: 1. The council's bad because it buys private police from london, who do something bad that was never elaborated on. 2. The government turned all the roads here into bus lanes, which is offensive to drivers. We were standing next to the road; cars were driving past. 3. "You get more in benefits than you do being at work, and that's wrong". 4. There are too many people coming over here, which is why there's no school places anymore (in an area with something like a 99% white-british population). 5. There has never been a civilisation in the middle east*. People are loving morons. *I forgot my usual doorstep demeanour and said "What, not even Egypt?", and got "That's in asia". Grate Britane 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
In retrospect, the Ottoman or Persian empire is probably a more obviously middle-eastern empire, but given Egypt's one of the great civilisations of the classical period it sprung to mind first. I guess it shouldn't be surprising the kind of people who vote tory think the middle east's just been sand and goats forever, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
Gradis posted:wow. thats terrible, so medical reasons are even banned? :/ bizarre. This is because anti-abortion dialogue has always been about oppressing women.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:I think there should be a general knowledge politics test before you can vote. I have no idea but I remember watching an interview on the news where some bozo came out all pumped about "BRITUN'S INDEPENDENCE DAY  " and the interviewer asked him if he was aware the community center he'd just exited was paid for with EU money."Oh, I wasn't, actually." "Do you think that might've affected your vote?" "...Yeah, probably, maybe."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:The EU is a fundamentally neoliberal institution that has no compunctions about economically crushing member states that threaten neoliberalism or the power of European financial institutions. Not to mention the racist implications of the "fortress Europe" immigration plan and the willingness to deal with dictators like Erdogan to carry out those plans. The EU reflects it's membership. If europe was more socialist the EU would have to be too, but they aren't, so it doesn't (well, actually, that might be part of the reason for it's present tensions, but, still).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
I went out to blow up some capitalism tanks and when I came back data was asking for definitions of what "kindness" meant or something, did I miss anything important in the last nine million pages?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:There is absolutely no mainstream left wing fixed
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
jabby posted:It's also an example of why the people who are bad at politics aren't Corbyn and the leadership team, they're the people opposing him. Today Labour forced a major concession out of the government and won a significant victory for women in Northern Ireland, but all you will see in the press is more talk of division and Brexit thanks to Chuka and his stupid loving amendment. this is good politics for Chuka since what he wants is for left-wing politics to appear non-functional to return copycat-blairism to power so it can continue doing nothing and losing to tories (but being Electable).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:Making himself hated by the party membership isn't going to help with that, it's just going to strengthen calls for deselection. Thus proving how out-of-touch the membership is now they've been infiltrated by militants! He wants the party to be owned by the proper people, not to accept the wind is changing and be less of a shithead.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
Borrovan posted:I've got the Mail after a lengthy period of rigorous forensic examination i have identified the source of your problems all of them
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 10:43
|
|
|
The main brexit thing is that it's impossible to oppose right now, because being anti-brexit at present isn't being for a sensible foreign policy, it's being against the fundamental rights and freedoms of the magna carta and a world without terrorism and infinite money from all the cakes we'll sell or something. The bad news has only just started and it's going to take at least a few months before it sinks in that the actual outcome of any deal is actually going to be "food's more expensive and businesses are hamstrung".
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
I don't think you can go "gently caress all of you, I'm glad your poorest and most vulnerable will suffer" then get self-righteously indignant when someone tells you you're being an rear end in a top hat, tbh
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:That's a loving pro title/av. It's incredible! I just got it and have no idea where from. I was kind of assuming my first red-text would be from a sleep-deprived meltdown about ebay or something. Guavanaut posted:It wasn't though, that's the stupidest thing about the right wing leave campaigns. Entire talking points centered around non-EU member Turkey, about Sharia Law, about Syrian refugees, about laws that were made in the UK, about the ECtHR, about international treaties that would still be in place post any kind of Brexit barring full Juche hermit kingdom Brexit. Yeah, right-wing populism was a bizarre mix of "SOVREIGNITY", and "Muslims! Refugees! Sharia law!", which, even accepting they're issues to idiots, are two different issues. I'd say somewhere between 30-50% of it was at the EU, but way more of it was about stuff that was barely related.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:But the big red title implores us to ask you about it If asked I will be happy to speculate wildly on the subject!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
LeoMarr posted:whats Corbyns plan to reduce terrorism in the UK? "not fire literally thousands of police officers and slash every security related budget to the bone"?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:The risk is that there might not be enough resources in the whole world to spread that wealth to everyone else. That's my liberal centrist worry: we actually can't produce enough for a global surplus at our current level of technology and when that becomes obvious people will get violent so as to get their share. At present (or at least a little while ago) we produced enough food for everyone on earth to be well-fed. Food production growth has outpaced population growth for two decades. This is a relatively unoptimised output because food production is kinda hosed, but that's still a shitload of food. The issue is that an enormous portion of this goes into bins, and even of the food that makes it into mouths, a load of it is going into the same mouths so people are eating like 3000-4000 calories when they need 2000-2500. The trouble is, like the Empire did in Ireland and India, modern states do in Africa and the middle east; food doesn't go to the starving because the starving are too poor. LeoMarr posted:this countrt is undwr constant threat of terrorism and corbyn has showb ti.e ans time again. a lackadasical responae to the ordeal that norml cotizens experi3nce or worry about. in concerned that the guy may make things worse on the gloval stage and in that may beunable to maintain civil harmony between religious sects. I'm genuinely getting concerned you're having a stroke.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:It's not food we need to worry about : It's stuff like metals, fossil fuels (even if just for plastics), the stuff used to make western consumer goods generally. We can feed the world, sure, but can we cloth and house them to 1st world standards? I dunno, maybe not, but is that stuff necessary to have a happy society? Something Awful's great and all, but I can't say it justifies millions starving. We'd find stuff to do, especially if in this magic universe where we actually care about global society we had a major switch to renewables and thus much greater energy security. It'd probably be a future where we have way more public infrastructure and way fewer iphones and nice cars, but I can't say that'd really be worse.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:See, this is why I think the fantasy of fully automated luxury communism is a dead end. There may just be enough to go around, but the barrier isn't just the finitude of rare materials it's also stuff like the environmental cost of extracting and processing them. In global terms a fairer distribution of material wealth might actually necessitate some form of austerity in order to become sustainable. With the literal fate of the planet hanging in the balance, though, I think it'd probably be okay and worth it. Maybe if folk are more collective about ownership we won't need to have so many electronic devices to one person, or for every person to have their own car or a house or flat to themselves. When you get right down to it collective ownership offers economies of scale unattainable under consumer cpitalism. Yeah, exactly. I mean, we can synthesise hydrocarbons, too. Fischer-Tropsch's existed since the 20s. Germany was using it for something like 25% of it's wartime fuel production. Hell, since it extracts CO2, imagine if we were using renewable energy to pull carbon out of the atmosphere and turn it into plastic and raincoats?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:Well yea: if renewables pay off and give us the holy grail of free energy, we can synthesise most poo poo via chemistry: the burden has always been the energy cost to do so more than the understanding. Renewables can give us free energy, the issue is nobody wants to build them because either NIMBYs or fossil fuel lobbyists. Yeah renewable is less efficient but it's not like we're short of wind or sun, especially if, say, we just covered the sahara in solar panels or something. That's even before we get into insane super-engineering ideas like a giant space satellite that beams solar power to the earth via laser or something. OwlFancier posted:Genuinely a secure life to me would be valuable enough to give up a lot of hypothetical possibilities. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
CoolCab posted:alternately we could build a shitton of nuclear power plants and actually increase our energy use by a lot, and it would probably be both easier and cheaper then covering the entire Sahara with solar panels Nuclear fission is a process that requires mining, though. I fully agree we shouldn't be ignoring nuclear to the extent we are, but at the same time nuclear is a stopgap until we get either fission or cover the sahara in solar panels.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 21:36
|
|