|
Diet Crack posted:Dear UKMT - what is a left leaning paper that isn’t going to shovel fabricated antisemitism bullshit down my throat? There isn't one sorry
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2019 10:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 05:21 |
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:Absolutely agree, just hand wringing is a bit rubbish - but whose events I can attend instead to achieve change now? From what I've seen recently in the news the capitalists and taking direct action themselves by not paying their miners to the point that they block the rails taking the coal out of the mines..
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2019 11:04
|
|
|
CGI Stardust posted:That just makes me wonder what they're going to try while everyone's looking at the show. Johnson's a good showman, and Cummings apparently likes confusion and misdirection. It's all a bit Hypernormalization. Maybe I'm overthinking things, and I just need to sit back, turn my brain off, and enjoy it all while buying lots of canned food. Isn't neoliberalism plus nationalism pretty much straight-up fascism though? It's just saying the quiet parts of neoliberalism out loud.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2019 12:37
|
|
|
I could podcast, I have free time and brisk opinions. No mic tho
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2019 11:14
|
|
|
Lol i can probably find a mic but it will be a very poo poo mic.Sanitary Naptime posted:By definition then you cannot podcast. I could I have like 3 twitters but I don't use any of them I hate twitter so much. Kassad posted:I Have No Mic, and I Must Podcast: a 21st century horror story 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2019 11:22
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:I've spent most of this morning having some weird Australian dumbshit posting about how mad I am and spamming transphobic attack helicopter memes at me because I called him a bootlicker for insulting Greta Thunberg for being called "deeply disturbed" Seriously after Fox News, the Heil, and the S*n, Twitter is the next most useful site whose servers could just spontaneously combust and nothing at all of value would be lost.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2019 11:27
|
|
|
TBF i probably don't need a mic you can probably reproduce most of my contributions with a screenreader just going aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2019 12:42
|
|
|
Best hot chocolate I've ever had was at Max Brenner's in Sydney. It's a chocolate cafe, they literally have vats of melted chocolate and the hot chocolate is that plus some cream. Gorgeous.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2019 14:25
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:loving lol I just read the shadowrun wiki entries for the history of the UK and Ireland and tbh I think they're more plausible than the one we're currently living in: Fukken bring on the magipocalypse tbh
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
Ratjaculation posted:Going subway (lol) I will take one footlong death of capitalism please. Toasted.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2019 13:33
|
|
|
Totally Normal Countrycast Gotta be.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
Contrariwise: don't buy a ring at all, or buy a cheap temporary one. Your proposee will probably prefer to buy their own unless you have a VERY good idea of both their taste and ring size. I proposed at home using a piece of costume jewellery that my dad used to propose to my mum, which was later replaced with my wife's great aunt's engagement ring. Which got lost. I also made her a silver ring which she wears as her engagement ring now, but that was a fortnight after we got married.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
Yah, even if it is illegal it's not like anyone will care, or like they would contest it given that they will care a lot more about the success of their party than their country, and won't want to do anything to impede it. They can all loving eat themselves. But also, there's no eyeroll big enough for 'we're firing all these people for not being incompetent enough to believe Brexiting with no deal in 3 loving months is good, actually'.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 11:48
|
|
|
Eschenique posted:I'm looking for information on the original vote in the commons that brought about the Brexit referendum and I found this. Yes, basically. A few of the Labour right also voted for the bill, but Labour whipped to abstain, IIRC because the Tories had an absolute majority anyway, so voting no was pointless as it wouldn't affect the decision, and would have been divisive at the time, and because it was a manifesto commitment on the part of the Tories, and tradition dictates not opposing manifesto commitments or some bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 12:09
|
|
|
Noxville posted:Love examples of capitalism being beyond parody https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49234054 This kind of still feels better, though. Paper is biodegradable and made from renewable resources, whereas plastic is neither, and let's be honest it's not like even 1% of McD's straws were recycled anyway, even if they were recyclable. Or like straws make the slightest bit of difference in the grand scheme of McDonalds' environmental impact, compared to mass deforestation to grow farting cows, or distribution chains, or the power used to air condition all their restaurants, or... etc.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 13:14
|
|
|
The big problem with 'get rid of all the guns' in the US is that there are SO loving MANY OF THEM and getting rid of them requires the cooperation of the gun owners. It's functionally impossible to disarm the US population without their participation.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 13:17
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Ultimately none of it matters because until there's enough elected officials and states will to repeal the second amendment all they are doing is fidgeting in the margins. I mean, yeah. Tesseraction posted:who would win: Why the gently caress would the US military be fighting itself?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 13:25
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Nails otoh... Why not both tho? Address the guns AND the assholes using them.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 13:41
|
|
|
Ratjaculation posted:do you still get a plastic lid with your paper straw? seems a bit pointless. The whole thing is a pointless distraction from the bigger issues they don't want to address, so
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 13:53
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:https://twitter.com/johnmcdonnellmp/status/1158345317416407040?s=21 WHY IS THE LEFT ATTACKING PEOPLE OF COLOUR screams the Mail as it gradually shrinks and turns into a corncob
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2019 14:50
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/05/government-national-unity-no-deal-margaret-beckett-referendum Peitition to call these people NUGgets. Sanford posted:I’m driving down to Exeter today because a charity called the Exeter Leukaemia Fund selfishly has its hq in Exeter rather than, for example, Nottingham and gently caress me it’s a long way. I’ve been driving for two hours and I’m only halfway there. I managed to listen to radio 4 for nearly twenty minutes before realising I’d prefer a podcast about d&d, or a talking book about the Second World War, or just silence. My dad still listens to radio 4 every day and I’m definitely seeing where the brain worms sneak in. Radio 2 is OK as long as you turn it off when Jeremy Vine starts. Popmaster is in half an hour. thespaceinvader fucked around with this message at 10:07 on Aug 6, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 10:03
|
|
|
WHy yes I would like to involuntarily lie in a stranger's lap during takeoff unless I happen to be AMAZING at ab crunches.Sulphagnist posted:Also assuming they want to maximize catching the people they actually want to catch. Resources aren't infinite and time spent going through the luggage of some harmless professor is time wasted. This is the reason. it's nothing to do with laziness or incompetence, it's a mixture of easier profiling, and simple security theatre. Can't make the point that these are scary times you should be scared of without randomly stopping people occasionally. I got randomly bag-searched on my way through the airport last time I flew, I didn't make anything of it at the time (for obvious reasons) but it pissed me off in retrospect.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 11:13
|
|
|
Barry Foster posted:Trump will stomp him into the ground. They're both senile old racist bastards, but Trump's got that psycho energy Biden is like, the epitome of the liberal candiate. I.e. completely loving useless against a fascist.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 12:27
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:You don't actually experience that much G-force when taking off in an airliner, so I don't think you need to be amazing at ab crunches. I mean yes but it's not as funny if you're realistic about it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2019 13:24
|
|
|
I mean, they definitely do HAVE all those things. They won't USE them for that purpose. Which is the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 11:28
|
|
|
Zalakwe posted:I have worked extensively in low carbon energy tech and you would be surprised how much of it is funded by companies whose business model relies on fossil fuels. They aren't idiots, they realise the world is changing and they want the IP and the greenwash. If they funded it adequately, we wouldn't have the problem. Hell, if they stopped actively spending money on people who actively propagandise against the problem, and stopped actively spending money buying politicians who ignore the problem, if they had not chosen to ignore the problem in the 70s... If they funded it even close to adequately, we wouldn't have the problem. But they would also lose their primary business model so thespaceinvader fucked around with this message at 13:16 on Aug 7, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 13:12
|
|
|
Zalakwe posted:I don't dispute any of this but it doesn't mean we don't want their money. Schlumberger put up millions for ERA I mentioned above. Without that cash there is no way the Government would have come in with £60 million match funding. I'd prefer for environmental orgs that are researching green power to have NONE of the oil companies' money, and their lobbyists, pet politicians, propaganda youtube channels and youtubers, TV channels, roving science denialists, etc, to also have none of their money, than for both to have their money. The latter are doing FAR more harm than the former are doing good. Defending loving Schlumberger isn't exactly a good look, until they complete divest themselves from loving OILFIELD SERVICES and start putting ALL of their phenomenal amounts of money into unfucking the planet. And even then, it's not gonna be a great look, because they're still a giant megacorporation. Schlumberger would do more good by not existing at all, than they're doing by existing in their current model. And they're among the least horrible of the many, many horrible oil companies.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 14:48
|
|
|
I wonder how many of them will even still be the Labour candidates at the next election...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 15:30
|
|
|
Miftan posted:Depends. Reelection takes ages if there are even any candidates and if a GE is called halfway through the process you run with your current MP. At least a few of the worst have voluntarily not continued in post already, though. Albeit, the likes of Hoey wouldn't have been joining this group anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 15:33
|
|
|
Zalakwe posted:Can you quote where I defend them? I mean, what else is naming a specific company and saying they enabled the government to do a Good Environment Thing?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
Zalakwe posted:It's just that, a statement of fact. To be honest I know very little about Schlumberger aside from their involvement in that particular project. I disagree wholeheartedly wityh all three statements here. 1: Oil companies are having a terrible impact on the environment and must do better: oil companies are probably the single worst group of companies for the environment, and should be forcibly broken up. 2: Oil companies are important to funding some important environmental projects: that funding could and should come from governments taxing everyone and using the money to pay for those environmental projects. Oil companies providing it is purely and simply an effort for them to make more profit by seeming more environmentally friendly, so they can pump more oil and sell mroe oil products. Them supporting environmental projects is actively hurting the environment as a result. Because their very EXISTENCE hurts the environment. 3: Given the scale of the problem and timeframe involved we need to be practical as well as confrontationa: we've tried practical for the past loving half century, it hasn't worked. It's time for confrontational.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
Zalakwe posted:It's just that, a statement of fact. To be honest I know very little about Schlumberger aside from their involvement in that particular project. Or, to put it another way: if I take £100 out of your bank account, but I give you back one in exchange, does that sound like a good loving exchange? Does that sound like something worthy even of bringing up in a positive sense?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
Sadly the most progress we can hope for at the moment is 'not sticking in several more knives then complaining that you are killing the knife-sticking industry by dying'.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
Zalakwe posted:Sorry it seems I haven't communicated clearly as straw men are springing up everywhere. Surely.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2019 11:17
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Yeah, the main reasons I didn't vote Leave were Corbyn's "actually things are bad but a Tory Brexit would be much worse", Farage's "let's run a literal nazi propaganda poster about the swarms of undesirables that'll be a laugh", and a couple of STEM types saying "yeah the EU has been a force for unbelievable poo poo sometimes, but the whole Leave campaign is based on nostalgia for things that never were and zero understanding of logistics." Dammit I knew that joke was missing something. Zalakwe posted:Just make it up why don't you? #whoosh. We need their money and likely their engineering and delivery capacity to prevent catastrophe. Yes. Specifically, we need it not to be doing what it is currently doing. They aren't going to stop doing that unless we make them, or the damage it is causing becomes so severe that it impacts their immediate profits to the point where they have to, which is well past the point where them stopping would be helpful. Even ignoring the fact that that point has long since passed and they haven't fuckign stopped. They literally knew 50 years ago that they needed to radically change their model to avoid killing the planet and instead they doubled down. We also need engineering and delivery capacity and money to prevent catastrophe but those things are not ever going to do that if they are in the control of companies whose sole goal and reason for existence is PROFIT from OIL. If you think we can get out of the pocket of big oil fast enough to deliver the research and investment necessary to avert the climate crisis you are dreaming. Right back at you. Taking their money to do some greenwashing whilst continuing to allow them to drill and frack and bake shale and so on and so forth, is exactly the opposite of getting out of the pocket of big oil. It is directly cooperating with them to climb further loving in. It's not about someone getting richer, that's a secondary problem (though don't get me wrong, it absolutely is a problem). It's about the oil industry's existence being one of the primary drivers of the single largest catastrophe currently facing mankind. Note, however, that I'm not suggesting that greenwashing money should be refused (though we absolutely shouldn't be putting any oil company branding on any of it, or giving any of them any credit for it at all, regardless of what the contracts might say). However, it's never going to be enough - it literally cannot be enough - to prevent the damage the oil industry is doing, unless we start actively confiscating money at a level which severely impacts profits, at the bare minimum, from companies which are actively killing the planet, before they succeed, if they haven't already succeeded, at killing the drat planet. It may be that that is impossible. I suspect it is impossible. But the status quo ante clearly isn't successfully addressing the issue, and the status quo ante has included oil companies using tiny proportions of their profits for greenwashing endeavours since the 70s. Greenwashing oil companies aren't new, and it clearly isn't working.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2019 12:32
|
|
|
bessantj posted:I've had a few conversations with Brexiteers over the last few days and something that always seems to come up is 'self-sufficiency' and it got me thinking is the U.K. actually self-sufficient in anything? Gammon? (In all seriousness, maybe water, but I think that's about it)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2019 13:16
|
|
|
This seems much more likely to be a horrible reflection of the current curriculum, than the BBC...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2019 12:18
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:Dunno about trepanation but I think I've had enough of this thread. Just feel like I need it like a hole in the head. Stop... following it then?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2019 12:40
|
|
|
That is loving awful and at the bare minimum she should file a formal complaint about the therapist.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2019 13:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 05:21 |
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:lol, the Democrats are watching their front-runner slowly transform into Trump: The vast majority of democrats are just a right wing as the republicans, they just say the quiet parts less loudly. More at 11.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2019 15:24
|
|