Printable View
I'm with IA here - although I respect socialist parties, I would never vote for a party that conducted itself the way the SWP did over that matter. We're not talking about the actions of a rogue member, what that case showed was them acting as a party in failing to report a rape case to the police - that is not OK on any level.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
I'm happy to see you mock respect. However I don't think it's fair to suggest that the Islamic wing is hardcore. More traditional conservative immigrants really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiaexz
Pretty much true I'm not worried about these. Conservative muslims are usually really nice people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Last time I looked upon Respect were pre-big brother, and there were big divides on many issues due to conflict of interests. If it has changed since then, I was never encouraged to challenge the held belief.
Only party I would actively support would be my ideal hypothetical party, the "Initiative" party. Instead of casually going around following public mood and trends, it would simply work to produce the best policy. It would clearly outline what it goals would be, then it would look at many approaches which bring about the results. Ultimately, it is more a goal-directed approached opposed to an ideological one, though it would have some certain ideological tenets it would be guided by. In many ways, it would allow those from left and right to take part and it wouldn't be ashamed to ask questions to Furunculus on military policy whilst talking to HoreTore on education and giving a phone call to PVC on religious matters. By this, it would actually listen (but doesn't mean it will take that particular suggestion) on what is best. Though, it would probably end up in a mix of socialism (collective policies: NHS for example), libertarianism (freedoms on personal level, such as personal use of currently illegal substances), with a few straying influences depending on what people want.
I'm with IA here - although I respect socialist parties, I would never vote for a party that conducted itself the way the SWP did over that matter. We're not talking about the actions of a rogue member, what that case showed was them acting as a party in failing to report a rape case to the police - that is not OK on any level.
..................................................
How does the actually work?
Can you go to the police and get charges pressed even if the victim doesn't want to go to the police?
Rape cases are difficult enough to prove as it is if you make the victim uncooperative then it just isn't ever going to work without some pretty convincing CCTV footage.
As I said I have very little information on this and if the party actively discouraged her from going to the police that is on a different level.
As far as I can tell though she asked the party to deal with it and he was found innocent by a bunch of his friends and the wider party seemed fairly split on the issue...
This tells me absolutely nothing...
Just out of interest what is the actual problem though....
A) They dealt with the allegation themselves as the alleged victim requested
B) They found him innocent
If there is some solid evidence out there that proves B) is wrong then forgive me but without any of us knowing or seeing the evidence we haven't got a clue so I am guessing the problem is A)
Which brings me back to my earlier question
_____________________________________
How does the actually work?
Can you go to the police and get charges pressed even if the victim doesn't want to go to the police?
_____________________________________
Probably both.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
A, because they do not have the resources to carry out such an investigation - or more importantly, give the victim the support they need.
And B, because the potential for abuse through self-interest is obvious. We keep the legal branch separate for a reason.
I prefer the "Rhyfelwyr" party, which is based around a well-meaning and radical cause that is ultimately doomed according to its own basic tenets. As separating themselves from the corrupt world around them is in a sense part of their beliefs, its followers fail to capitalise on what could have been a populist message, instead isolating themselves and losing any mainstream support. It causes complete chaos and destruction as it loses any practical value and instead runs itself into the ground, continuing to function purely on emotion and nostalgia, fuelled themselves by its own semi-self-fulfilling prophecy of being a romantic yet ultimately hopeless cause. As this process of romanticization and self-destruction continues, the followers become increasingly isolated and radicalised until the whole thing implodes in a flurry of desperation, nostalgia and idealism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiaexz
Having proved the most bizarrely self-destructive and counter-productive movement in history, it somewhat fittingly continues to live on in the form of mythology - preserving the purity of an idea that was too pure to change itself to ever function in the world it was meant for.
Seriously, if I ever run for office, do not vote for me. :no:
But isn't the root of ideology a goal?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiaexz
I think every ideology has a goal and in many cases the goals overlap but there is no consensus on how to get there and both/all sides will bring up relatively valid arguments depending on the problem.
I wouldn't be so sure that the party can easily find the one solution to all these problems without tearing itself apart in the discussions preceding that.
Surely a new approach or a new mix of ideas wouldn't hurt though.
And Rhyfelwyr, at least you're funny if you want to be, so don't be so hard on yourself. :yes:
Are you for real?Quote:
Just out of interest what is the actual problem though....
A) They dealt with the allegation themselves as the alleged victim requested
B) They found him innocent
Really. Are you?
*I've never used the ignore function as I believe in people having their say, however you are sorely testing my patience.*
Resist the dark side you must, your belief the right one is.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
As for the problem, as far as I understand it:
If a person says there is a rape and a member of your organization whom you know is accused, you help the police in finding the truth, you can't just set up a court yourself.
First off, you're biased, for that reason policemen are usually barred from investigating against their own partner and so on. Secondly, what the victim wants does not always matter that much, I'm pretty sure if the crime is bad enough, the state attourney can start his own investigation once he hears of the allegations. So yes, you can always go to the police, in the worst case they'll say they can't do anything but then at least you tried.
If the heads of an organization declare that their organization is clean after their own investigation, how can you trust them? They obviously have an interest in declaring their organization clean to draw more voters/customers/members.
Worst case is usually true in my experience, unfortunately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Stop the negativism, if they searched your home every two days because some crime happened somewhere near where you live and they stored all your fingerprints, retinas, DNA and whatnot indefinitely so that they could always easily do something whenever a crime happens, you'd probably voice concerns about your privacy. If you want to retain some privacy, you have to accept the other side of the coin as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
What are you talking about? What does privacy have to do with the low conviction rates for rape?Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
What are you talking about? How often have you been raped and gone to the police for help?Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
You said "in my experience" so I took that to mean that you have personally been turned down by the police a few times, not specifically related to rape.
Having the DNA of every single citizen in a databank could often help in rape cases. The guy would just have to lose a hair or not use a condom... Unless you're saying the police are not interested in investigating such cases in the first place and you have several personal experiences of that kind, which would be a bit weird unless you're a street worker or so. :inquisitive:
Personally? No. Had someone close to me? Yes. Multiple times. Each time we knew who it was but could not do anything because none of the other victims would come forward. You dont get much out of he said she said. All I meant to say that the "nothing we can do" option is taken quite often. I would appreciate it if you would not project your asinine crap on me, I could not give a damn about your percieved Orwellian nightmare.
If you know who it was what's holding you back from doing things yourself. The guy who sexually abused a good friend of mine now knows what his teeth taste like. That's how you deal with things, niceties are just for nice people. Kick his ass and properly make him understand that it will be worse next time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Yes, sadly. It's also sad that it happens so often around you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
You say yourself that the problem is that victims do not come forward, how is that the fault of the police?
Or was that not what you were saying?
??? The what? I don't understand and don't have any nightmares of this kind. No idea what you're projecting on me now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
InsaneApache I have added you to my ignore list and I would appreciate it if you could do the same for me.
One of these days? Lighten up man, get yourself a smoke and think of cute kittens and fluffy bunnies
It is, in many ways. But the thing is, many ideologies want the right things at the wrong times/situation. You will have the cut welfare party in the middle of a depression, emptying the economy even more with the situation making it worse. This was after following the increase spending party who borrowed money during an economic boom (morons). Both parties got it wrong in the situations because their economic policy favours the other situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
My ideal party would be cutting spending during an economic boom and increase spending in a bust from all the saved up rainy day money. It would run on a governmental debt-free system, perhaps giving international loans to other countries (like China does) for increased income.
I've never used the ignore list, even though a few people throughout the years gave me ample reason to do so. It's just as easy to ignore these posts by not reading them, if you predict that it will be the same old. And it's a lot less draconian.
If this was a fist-fight, a minor assault or something like that I could have understood (even if I did not agree). Since we're talking about a far more serious crime the party should have encouraged the woman to take it to the police.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
From the Independent article: with one member stating that the party had “no faith in the bourgeois court system to deliver justice”.
This is a typical example of the mindset of these far-left ideologues. Their party has all the answers and they don't even view opposing political views as legitimate. A committee from their higher ranks is better able to dispense justice then the system which 99,9% of the British rely on. That somebody raped a woman is awful of course, but it's the way they handled it that shows their real colours.
Like I said, I believe in people holding opposite views to me and value freedom of speech. In that spirit, I decline your offer.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
Well said.Quote:
Resist the dark side you must, your belief the right one is.
Cute Kittens and Fluffy Bunnies is, I believe, the name of Crazed Rabbit's website wherein he is plotting the overthrow of humanity. Or I might be mistaken.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
That's hardly a mindset exclusive to the far left, actually I think it is universal for most hard line parties.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kralizec
It's universal in heavily closed organisations, it's not instrumantal to the far left, that's trueQuote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Like I always said: Communists and fascists, two cheeks of the same arse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Well let me see.
Authoritarian.
Controlling.
Subvert the individual to the state.
Oppressive.
Undemocratic.
et al....
Need I go on?
I think he's saying that ideological gloss aside, they end up resulting in the same kind of regime.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube
To be fair, I think he is right in saying that. The corporatism you mentioned means the state acting as a mediator between the different social classes and their representatives (eg Trade Unions and Corporate Lobbies) - that describes Britain in the 1970's, it does not describe Nazi Germany, which really functioned in much the same way as the Soviet Union in that regard - state ownership or at least effective control/directing of the means of production.
:2thumbsup:Quote:
I think he's saying that ideological gloss aside, they end up resulting in the same kind of regime.
Oh I didn't realise it was a quiz!Quote:
That's only half-right.
So what is the answer?
Those details are strong enough to literally be a matter of life and death, so while they do have some similarities and are often quite nasty, calling them the same is negligent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
How to put it? The colour of extremism is the same, but the way it's reached leaves a large print.
But I said that in reality Nazi Germany wasn't corporatist - it used state control for major industries just like the Soviets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside