|
|
11
Sure, I realised you were representing my point not supporting it. You’ll have to explain a bit more is it that my suggestion that metaphysics is important, ridicules vast swathes of society?
12
« Last post by Oldmanmatt on Today at 11:56:24 am »
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony
😁
Ah but the idea of some mystical, omnipotent, wisdom; selecting the most able and just leader, has great appeal when your real options are selecting the clown with the least silly nose…
OMM is on point here Sean, the idea of the grail quest and a sense of the sacred as part of an understanding of and desire to protect nature. Metaphysics isn’t a part of the progressive project.
Your obsession with cocks and Nazi’s is your own.
Ah. Hmmm. No. I didn’t mean to suggest that I thought it was a good idea, though I quite see why you thought that. I rather meant that you, Toxic, saw every real option as a bunch of clowns. I actually don’t. Are you aware that you dehumanise vast swathes of society in your thinking? First pigeonholing them into (bizzare) categories then writing them off as irrelevant? Or stupid? I find people to be a little more complicated than that.
13
« Last post by Oldmanmatt on Today at 11:47:22 am »
I believe they’re a very mainstream, real, theory (not to be confused with MSM,
Brutus, given your history, some of the things you have endured and watched others endure (I only know that little bit that I’ve heard in passing, since we knocked around different ends of the same community, though I don’t think we ever actually met) I’m not surprised at your anger at “the system”. But, do you not think that you’ve set up a bit of an echo chamber? Personally, I think ALL media (especially opinion based) requires a pinch of salt that would render the Dead Sea quite drinkable.
Who was it above that had the hard on for Centrists (tm)? Can’t be arsed to reread. Encouraging Centrists (tm) to your side of the divide is how you win elections. No win,no power, no change. You should love them, embrace them and then you can gently guide them to utopia. Sort of.
Abbot might very well be a very nice person, with admirable ideals and notions. She is also a gaff prone, lose cannon and widely known. There might be plenty of others, with similar views, but lower profiles, who avoid the purge (shouldn’t that make you happy?) but her deselection seems prudent. The “bad optics” are in the eyes of the deeper shades of red in the party, the optics to the population in general, much better.
Echo chamber? I'm surrounded by 'mainstream' views, media, talking points, I listen to the radio... I hear all the mainstream narratives. I also follow and listen to a number of people funded news channels.. This is just sidelining the arguments though.
The fact that you have chosen just Dianne Abbott to illustrate that purging MPs and members might be tolerable because there maybe some 'left' folk that have escaped says something about echo chambers. She's been viciously vilified by the media and the leadership for some of the things she has said. Compare and contrast her sins with Akehurst's - it's not even a competition and yet noone is going after him - he's all good.
Having made this about Dianne Abbott....The best thing about all of this, is that having gone into her constituency and spoken to people the party has shit itself. A u-turn has been performed, Starmer has huge respect for Diane and she can stand as a Labour MP.  Question is will she tell them to shove it?
Yup. That’s politics. Much more so than us blathering on about quite detailed issues on here. We can both lament it, but politics is a popularity contest and like all such things, dependant making enough people “feel” like your party is the right choice and an even more lamentable number of those people will decide that based on detailed analysis of policies. I grind my teeth at headline readers, too. However, I’m sure I’ve met far more of them than truly thoughtful people. So, challenge. You have to pick one, for a moment imagine that there is no other possible choice (I’d say there isn’t, really, but that’s a different argument); Starmer or Sunak? Don’t abstain, that’s cheating.
14
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony
😁
Ah but the idea of some mystical, omnipotent, wisdom; selecting the most able and just leader, has great appeal when your real options are selecting the clown with the least silly nose…
OMM is on point here Sean, the idea of the grail quest and a sense of the sacred as part of an understanding of and desire to protect nature. Metaphysics isn’t a part of the progressive project. Your obsession with cocks and Nazi’s is your own.
15
I believe they’re a very mainstream, real, theory (not to be confused with MSM,
Brutus, given your history, some of the things you have endured and watched others endure (I only know that little bit that I’ve heard in passing, since we knocked around different ends of the same community, though I don’t think we ever actually met) I’m not surprised at your anger at “the system”. But, do you not think that you’ve set up a bit of an echo chamber? Personally, I think ALL media (especially opinion based) requires a pinch of salt that would render the Dead Sea quite drinkable.
Who was it above that had the hard on for Centrists (tm)? Can’t be arsed to reread. Encouraging Centrists (tm) to your side of the divide is how you win elections. No win,no power, no change. You should love them, embrace them and then you can gently guide them to utopia. Sort of.
Abbot might very well be a very nice person, with admirable ideals and notions. She is also a gaff prone, lose cannon and widely known. There might be plenty of others, with similar views, but lower profiles, who avoid the purge (shouldn’t that make you happy?) but her deselection seems prudent. The “bad optics” are in the eyes of the deeper shades of red in the party, the optics to the population in general, much better.
Echo chamber? I'm surrounded by 'mainstream' views, media, talking points, I listen to the radio... I hear all the mainstream narratives. I also follow and listen to a number of people funded news channels.. This is just sidelining the arguments though. The fact that you have chosen just Dianne Abbott to illustrate that purging MPs and members might be tolerable because there maybe some 'left' folk that have escaped says something about echo chambers. She's been viciously vilified by the media and the leadership for some of the things she has said. Compare and contrast her sins with Akehurst's - it's not even a competition and yet noone is going after him - he's all good. Having made this about Dianne Abbott....The best thing about all of this, is that having gone into her constituency and spoken to people the party has shit itself. A u-turn has been performed, Starmer has huge respect for Diane and she can stand as a Labour MP. Question is will she tell them to shove it?
16
« Last post by mark20 on Today at 11:01:15 am »
17
I both think that a nation state with it's own currency is a crucial administrative unit that ought to be cherished and protected.
AND I think that it's vital that nationhood should be inclusive of multiculturalism. Basically we should all take responsibility for making our country a great place for everyone who resides here.
AND I think we should show respect for and act fairly towards people elsewhere in the world.
I realise that many people consider the whole concept of nationhood as being unseemly. They feel that we should all be making an effort towards amalgamating administrative systems with the rest of the world. I think that debate gets muddied by conflating it with the sort of nationalism opposed by my 2nd and 3rd points.
I agree with all 3 points Stone. Although realistically, I think the culture industry has its work cut out to manufacture this one.
18
« Last post by Oldmanmatt on Today at 10:37:10 am »
I both think that a nation state with it's own currency is a crucial administrative unit that ought to be cherished and protected.
AND I think that it's vital that nationhood should be inclusive of multiculturalism. Basically we should all take responsibility for making our country a great place for everyone who resides here.
AND I think we should show respect for and act fairly towards people elsewhere in the world.
I realise that many people consider the whole concept of nationhood as being unseemly. They feel that we should all be making an effort towards amalgamating administrative systems with the rest of the world. I think that debate gets muddied by conflating it with the sort of nationalism opposed by my 2nd and 3rd points.
To point one. Really? Why? After all if Borogravia sneezes, Klatchistan will have to wipe its own arse and there’s bound to be a global shortage of pickled cucumbers. Most nations are, in truth, really quite recent constructs and quite weird in their histories at that (didn’t Britain come under Dutch rule, late 17thC? I mean the PR was pretty good and blood letting minimal, but…) And as for the other two points, absolutely they conflict with the first. Conflict, not negate. We are hugely “down the road” towards a truly global human culture, where an individual nation’s culture begins to be on a par with that village where people chase cheeses down precipitous slopes, or march through the Main Street rolling flaming barrels of tar. Truth be told, I suspect we’ve been in that state for a few hundred years already, what with the colonial period and, well, if the assassination of some Central European Archduke, in a matter of weeks, leads to the industrial slaughter of millions in muddy trenches; it seems moot to dispute we’ve been a global society for quite a long time.
19
« Last post by joe-m on Today at 10:31:12 am »
Hi all, was just wondering if anyone had a pdf topo for goldsborough stashed around theyd be willing to share?
20
« Last post by stone on Today at 10:04:59 am »
I both think that a nation state with it's own currency is a crucial administrative unit that ought to be cherished and protected.
AND I think that it's vital that nationhood should be inclusive of multiculturalism. Basically we should all take responsibility for making our country a great place for everyone who resides here.
AND I think we should show respect for and act fairly towards people elsewhere in the world.
I realise that many people consider the whole concept of nationhood as being unseemly. They feel that we should all be making an effort towards amalgamating administrative systems with the rest of the world. I think that debate gets muddied by conflating it with the sort of nationalism opposed by my 2nd and 3rd points.
|
|
Recent Posts