UK Politics & Brexit Discussion

[Stan]

1 minute ago, RandoEFC said:

I thought Starmer didn't do himself any favours over the private letter/phonecall about schools opening stuff. Johnson got properly rattled but just because he's an overgrown schoolboy who doesn't understand that the whole point of PMQs is for the government to be scrutinised doesn't mean that Starmer had to excel himself to make Johnson look like the flustered man-baby that he is.

I also wish people would stop calling him "Boris" as if he's this fun character that's just your mate. He's the prime minister and he's supposed to be leading the country. Calling him Boris perpetuates this weird subconscious fetish people have for thinking that he's relatable because he has a goofy and sort of common name. He has next to nothing in common with either of us and Boris isn't even his real first name.

It's just a name to type. Nothing to do with friendliness or subconscious fetish  

I think calling him BoJo would be more along the lines of your description!

I think that private letter/phonecall thing wasn't essentially bad. 

[RandoEFC+]

3 minutes ago, Stan said:

It's just a name to type. Nothing to do with friendliness or subconscious fetish  

I think calling him BoJo would be more along the lines of your description!

I think that private letter/phonecall thing wasn't essentially bad. 

Maybe not for you but other people absolutely do see it that way and hearing other people call him Boris helps to perpetuate it even if they're not doing it for the same reason.

[RandoEFC+]

@Bluebird Hewitt thoughts on this? A bit surprising as I thought Welsh Labour's handling of the pandemic hasn't been universally praised.

[Bluebird Hewitt]

3 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

@Bluebird Hewitt thoughts on this? A bit surprising as I thought Welsh Labour's handling of the pandemic hasn't been universally praised.

That's pretty much the mindset of Wales in general. Polls like this are meaningless as people will always vote Labour regardless of what they do (such as shutting A&E's and fobbing it off on the health board by insisting they can't do anything about it, not sacking a chief executive despite a big maternity scandal that lasted a few years, a health being being in special measures for the past 5 years, scrapping the much needed M4 relief road and using some of the money on 'alternative methods' that don't exist, demolishing a bus station in Cardiff a few years ago and still not even coming close to starting work on a new one, wanting to charge a congestion fee for driving to Cardiff despite a lack of public transport infrastructure, giving loan after loan on the government owned Cardiff Airport while those who got fucked by the floods got pittance overall by comparison, only for the Welsh Labour Government to beg Westminster for £150m and trying to politicise it, giving a huge middle finger to the Welsh public by going against them during Brexit, the list can easily continue) and 'anyone but the Tories', as the usual saying goes

At the same time, the Tories themselves have not helped matters in this pandemic really with the PPE fiasco (that the Welsh Government also had issues with but barely got a mention) and the Cummings malarky. 

[Stan]

'do as I say, not as I do'... 

 

[RandoEFC+]

This ought to be interesting. The US-UK dynamic is one to watch between this, the chlorinated chicken stuff and the deafening silence from our government over Trump's recent behaviour.

[RandoEFC+]

Life's a bit odd these days huh. 

[6666]

So other than a couple of good speeches during the war, did Churchill do any good? I genuinely don't know as all I hear, apart from him giving good speeches during the war, was that he was either coked up or drunk and a racist imbecile that loved killing people. For a more balanced view, let's hear what the defence has to say.

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, 6666 said:

So other than a couple of good speeches during the war, did Churchill do any good? I genuinely don't know as all I hear, apart from him giving good speeches during the war, was that he was either coked up or drunk and a racist imbecile that loved killing people. For a more balanced view, let's hear what the defence has to say.

Well before Churchill we had Chamberlain who was an utter coward and under him Hitler was given a head start on fucking up Europe and murdering more Jews, Gypsies, gay people, and others.

Had the UK listened to Churchill earlier, chances are Hitler would have had a tougher time rampaging through Europe. Perhaps World War 2 would have been shorter and less deadly.

He was also pretty instrumental in getting American help to the UK and USSR before Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. The lend lease act kept us in the war and was a big part in keeping is in the fight before the Americans joined.

Lastly, it is a bit moronic to judge historical figures with the same societal standards we have today. In the 1930s and 1940s, pretty much everyone was a fucking racist by our standards.

If we’re going to look back at people with modern day lenses constantly then Gandhi’s legacy is 100% in trouble, along with Churchill’s. Because Gandhi would definitely not fall into the black lives matter camp - he hated black people. He actually quite liked Adolf Hitler.... and he was a pedophile.

[Stan]

7 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

If we’re going to look back at people with modern day lenses constantly then Gandhi’s legacy is 100% in trouble, along with Churchill’s. Because Gandhi would definitely not fall into the black lives matter camp - he hated black people. He actually quite liked Adolf Hitler.... and he was a pedophile.

Gandhi campaigned for peace all his life and was definitely not liking of Hitler. I'm not sure where that's come from but whenever I hear people talk about Gandhi that's one thing that is never said. On what basis did he like Hitler? They're 2 totally different characters in history and had 2 totally different directions. I don't think you could get 2 more differing people!

I read the other day (when all the Colston statue furore came about) that he wrote to Hitler pleading him to not go through with WWII and when he did, wrote to him again saying his actions were wrong and it's not the right thing to do, essentially. Obviously in more savage words than that.

I'm not sure of the paedophile thing either. Based on what?

I am aware that people used Gandhi's name for the 1984 Sikh Golden Temple attacks and that his actions in SA were akin to power in white hands and I don't agree with that at all. Like you say though, modern lenses makes those kinds of actions utterly terrible and despite liking Gandhi I can't vouch for what he did at that time in his life.

But when it comes to Hitler and Gandhi, I can't agree that he liked Hitler or that he was a paedophile. Hitler wanted terror and was on the far-right. Gandhi campaigned for peace and was totally against civil disobedience at a time when India was under strict British rule and where his own people were persecuted by British people...

[Dr. Gonzo]

23 minutes ago, Stan said:

Gandhi campaigned for peace all his life and was definitely not liking of Hitler. I'm not sure where that's come from but whenever I hear people talk about Gandhi that's one thing that is never said. On what basis did he like Hitler? They're 2 totally different characters in history and had 2 totally different directions. I don't think you could get 2 more differing people!

I read the other day (when all the Colston statue furore came about) that he wrote to Hitler pleading him to not go through with WWII and when he did, wrote to him again saying his actions were wrong and it's not the right thing to do, essentially. Obviously in more savage words than that.

I'm not sure of the paedophile thing either. Based on what?

I am aware that people used Gandhi's name for the 1984 Sikh Golden Temple attacks and that his actions in SA were akin to power in white hands and I don't agree with that at all. Like you say though, modern lenses makes those kinds of actions utterly terrible and despite liking Gandhi I can't vouch for what he did at that time in his life.

But when it comes to Hitler and Gandhi, I can't agree that he liked Hitler or that he was a paedophile. Hitler wanted terror and was on the far-right. Gandhi campaigned for peace and was totally against civil disobedience at a time when India was under strict British rule and where his own people were persecuted by British people...

The pedo thing is based on Gandhi himself writing that he slept with children. That one isn’t really disputable. Same with his thoughts on black people.

The Hitler thing I guess depends on how you want to take the context of his 2 letters to Hitler. But they’re weirdly friendly letters to a man who was a murderous fuckhead. This one is more disputable.

I think on the whole Gandhi’s legacy as a positive figure in history is well deserved. But I also think if we took a time machine and went back to meet him, we’d probably find some aspects of his life morally reprehensible. Same with Churchill - I think we’d all be speaking German and have no Jews in the UK if not for Hitler... but if we went back to meet him we’d think he’s a total cunt. I think we’d think most people from back then are total cunts tbh

[Stan]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The pedo thing is based on Gandhi himself writing that he slept with children. That one isn’t really disputable. Same with his thoughts on black people.

The Hitler thing I guess depends on how you want to take the context of his 2 letters to Hitler. But they’re weirdly friendly letters to a man who was a murderous fuckhead. This one is more disputable.

I think on the whole Gandhi’s legacy as a positive figure in history is well deserved. But I also think if we took a time machine and went back to meet him, we’d probably find some aspects of his life morally reprehensible. Same with Churchill - I think we’d all be speaking German and have no Jews in the UK if not for Hitler... but if we went back to meet him we’d think he’s a total cunt. I think we’d think most people from back then are total cunts tbh

I can't disagree with the final statements

It goes back to the different time, modern-day lenses thing. 

The letters to Hitler, for me, just personified Gandhi's calmer approach which is wildly different to Hitler's. Gandhi wanted universal peace (ever the optimist!). I think he wrote in the letter that despite calling him 'Dear Friend...' he said it because he has no foes, not because it was as a legit friend. I don't know if this is a fair comparison but it's like the Dalai Lama these days - also striving for world peace so you probably won't ever see him get in some heated argument regardless who he speaks to and regardless if that person is 100% cunt material. It's like a 'don't stoop to their level' trait. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

43 minutes ago, Stan said:

I can't disagree with the final statements

It goes back to the different time, modern-day lenses thing. 

The letters to Hitler, for me, just personified Gandhi's calmer approach which is wildly different to Hitler's. Gandhi wanted universal peace (ever the optimist!). I think he wrote in the letter that despite calling him 'Dear Friend...' he said it because he has no foes, not because it was as a legit friend. I don't know if this is a fair comparison but it's like the Dalai Lama these days - also striving for world peace so you probably won't ever see him get in some heated argument regardless who he speaks to and regardless if that person is 100% cunt material. It's like a 'don't stoop to their level' trait. 

Yeah and that’s a fair point about his letters to Hitler, he was definitely the bigger man. Plus Hitler can’t have been that friendly with him as he encouraged the UK to have Gandhi shot...

And yeah, looking back at history with modern lenses can make a lot of people look bad.

But I see no issue with statues of Gandhi or Churchill, whereas I can understand why people tore down the statue of a slaver. Churchill’s legacy to the UK goes beyond him being racist (like everyone was back then) and a warmonger - he led this country through a war where if we lost British society as we know it wouldn’t exist. Likewise, looking back on Gandhi night show us a guy who hated black people and went to weird lengths to show he was “resisting temptation” - but his legacy as a symbol for independence against imperialism and peaceful protest/civil disobedience is a far more lasting mark he left on India (and the world tbh).

These things make these men more iconic figures in history worthy of recognition than a man who’s legacy was of a murderer and a slave owner. That was Edward Colston’s most notable contribution to the UK and the world - it’s not an endearing contribution worthy of recognising in the UK after the abolishment of slavery. So it’s got no reason standing in 2020. I could argue the proper place for it though was a museum, not at the bottom of a harbour... but it’s a bit late for that unless they go dig it out.

[RandoEFC+]

Did anyone else see the BBC yesterday describe the people angry about that statue getting pulled down as "anti-racism critics" . If you're a critic of anti-racism then I can think of a more succinct description of what that makes you.

Anyway, Twitter grows increasingly entertaining over the last couple of days as said "anti-racism critics" have not only boycotted Yorkshire Tea and PG Tips but have now added Rage Against the Machine and Sainsbury's to their shit list because Tom Morello and Lord Sainsbury have both voiced their support of Black Lives Matter or removing the statues of slave traders.

Keep it up Britain. Hopefully before long all of those "anti-racism critics" will just boycott the whole country for not liking statues of slave traders and lock themselves and their weird world views up at home.

[Stan]

12 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Did anyone else see the BBC yesterday describe the people angry about that statue getting pulled down as "anti-racism critics" . If you're a critic of anti-racism then I can think of a more succinct description of what that makes you.

Anyway, Twitter grows increasingly entertaining over the last couple of days as said "anti-racism critics" have not only boycotted Yorkshire Tea and PG Tips but have now added Rage Against the Machine and Sainsbury's to their shit list because Tom Morello and Lord Sainsbury have both voiced their support of Black Lives Matter or removing the statues of slave traders.

Keep it up Britain. Hopefully before long all of those "anti-racism critics" will just boycott the whole country for not liking statues of slave traders and lock themselves and their weird world views up at home.

The RATM one is hilariously ironic.

What kind of 'machine' did they think they were raging against  

[Dr. Gonzo]

12 hours ago, Stan said:

The RATM one is hilariously ironic.

What kind of 'machine' did they think they were raging against  

The chorus of Nirvana’s “In Bloom” covers people like that pretty well.

[6666]

On 10/06/2020 at 11:04, RandoEFC said:

Did anyone else see the BBC yesterday describe the people angry about that statue getting pulled down as "anti-racism critics" . If you're a critic of anti-racism then I can think of a more succinct description of what that makes you.

Anyway, Twitter grows increasingly entertaining over the last couple of days as said "anti-racism critics" have not only boycotted Yorkshire Tea and PG Tips but have now added Rage Against the Machine and Sainsbury's to their shit list because Tom Morello and Lord Sainsbury have both voiced their support of Black Lives Matter or removing the statues of slave traders.

Keep it up Britain. Hopefully before long all of those "anti-racism critics" will just boycott the whole country for not liking statues of slave traders and lock themselves and their weird world views up at home.

Sometimes it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking we don't have idiots of the same calibre of America but then we're all reminded otherwise.

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, 6666 said:

Sometimes it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking we don't have idiots of the same calibre of America but then we're all reminded otherwise.

America was literally founded by the religious weirdos we didn't like having in the UK. It shouldn't be surprising the same kind of idiots exist in both nations.

[MUFC]

Pritti Patel called a coconut.

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/calling-asian-and-black-tories-sell-outs-is-racist-and-degrading-405013

[MUFC]

On 09/06/2020 at 13:21, 6666 said:

So other than a couple of good speeches during the war, did Churchill do any good? I genuinely don't know as all I hear, apart from him giving good speeches during the war, was that he was either coked up or drunk and a racist imbecile that loved killing people. For a more balanced view, let's hear what the defence has to say.

 

[6666]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

America was literally founded by the religious weirdos we didn't like having in the UK. It shouldn't be surprising the same kind of idiots exist in both nations.

I thought it was founded by people that didn't believe in religion and were more into science...

[Dr. Gonzo]

30 minutes ago, 6666 said:

I thought it was founded by people that didn't believe in religion and were more into science...

Nah it was religious weirdos for the most part

[RandoEFC+]

In utterly predictable fashion, we have become so consumed with taking down films and television series due to one racist comment in one episode which was taking the piss out of racists, not minorities, and started renaming buildings and tearing down statues of people whose uncle's dog growled at a black man once in 1792, that we have already forgotten about listening to and talking about what practical things can actually be done to challenge the systemic racism in society.

Yes, you need to take down statues of people who were involved in the slave trade. That's so far away from the norms of society during any of our lifetimes that it's an open goal. Pretty much everything else is being silly though. Taking down Churchill's statue isn't in the same ball park and just opens the door to more culture wars. It's silly. Renaming Gladstone Hall because the Gladstone that it was named after's Dad was involved in slavery is silly.

Taking Little Britain and Fawlty Towers off the air is pretty silly as well. I do so both sides to this one. Yes they're only joking and yes, like I've said they're mocking racists, not encouraging them, but people are stupid and impressionable and seeing someone black up or do Nazi salutes might be "they're so silly" in the moment but it also makes people think it's funny to do that stuff without the full understanding of what most people will see if they spot you doing something like that. However, this is a call for better education on these matters.

About 20-30 Labour MPs from BAME backgrounds sent a letter to Priti Patel today because she wasn't as outraged as them about racism as they saw it when in actual fact it's her job as Home Secretary to condemn unlawful behaviour. I saw someone on Twitter who criticised her for not being on board with tearing down the statue of a slave trader and then made a comment about how she's a combination of the sneering English upper class and the Indian elite or something that was in itself pretty racist. In people's efforts to be seen to be on board with the Black Lives Matter movement and anti-racism in general, which overwhelmingly begins with their heart in the right class but for some people soon becomes a pissing contest, they are starting to lose sight of what they're supporting in the first place. The letter sent by the BAME Labour MPs basically came across as saying "you might have suffered racial abuse but black people suffer worse racial abuse so if you disagree with us, you're against black people and you shouldn't use your own experience of racial abuse to facilitate racism against a different minority". If I'm biased, it's going to be in Labour's favour, but in this instance it really does just stink of them finding any excuse to make a government minister look bad and appearing to use the current issues around race to do so isn't a good look. That said, I'm a white person and I won't pretend to fully understand their first-hand views and experiences of the matter but that's the exact same reason that they shouldn't be throwing stones at Priti Patel over this.

It really is going mad out there and it'll probably settle down soon but you have to wonder how much the most left-wing-minded activists are going to try and push some sort of revolution narrative here. Showing support to Black Lives Matter at this time is vitally important and change has to be pursued but it isn't going to happen overnight and with the pandemic still lingering in a significant way in the UK, now isn't the time to be starting Green Street face-offs with each other over which statues of people who said racist things that weren't considered racist when they were alive should get thrown in rivers.

On a lighter note, Nigel Farage has 'agreed to resign' from LBC. I actually listened to his show a few times during the lockdown and didn't mind him too much as a radio presenter. He never crossed the line with his nuttiest views whenever I was listening but clearly some of the things he's said over the past week have been completely misguided and they've come to the right decision.

[6666]

I'm not sure if there's anyone protesting over what's on TV. Or what was on TV decades ago... I think the PC crowd have definitely used this as an opportunity to execute a land grab.

[RandoEFC+]

10 minutes ago, 6666 said:

I'm not sure if there's anyone protesting over what's on TV. Or what was on TV decades ago... I think the PC crowd have definitely used this as an opportunity to execute a land grab.

I'm not sure. It seems like after that statue got pulled down, and then Little Britain, which isn't that long ago and the scene in question was pretty offensive in some ways so alright, but it seems to have triggered a domino effect amongst the rest of these companies panicking so that they're not seen to be any less progressive than their rivals. Most of the usual "leftie mob" on social media are actually saying this is just getting silly now with a few exceptions.