British Election: peaceful revolution

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

I want to know how would Robin Hood vote, though. And especially Disney's fox version.

---

He was against Taxation by the Feudal Lords (Rich) because it deprived the poor, but he returned the money to them as per a welfare state. This train of thought rules out the conservatives and UKIP.

Robinhood seemed to be more pro-liberty and choice, so I would probably place him within the camp of the Liberal Democrats as he seeks a fairer and freer society.

As for James Bond... I would probably place him more in the conservative camp currently. He likes a luxury lifestyle, he doesn't really care about the warfare of others, however, he does feel a strong patriotic duty and favours heavy police/security enforcement, even though the Conservatives are failing on this front. However, under this, he could also be an advocate of 'New Labour' as seen under Tony Blair who did favour war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

He was against Taxation by the Feudal Lords (Rich) because it deprived the poor, but he returned the money to them as per a welfare state. This train of thought rules out the conservatives and UKIP.

Robinhood seemed to be more pro-liberty and choice, so I would probably place him within the camp of the Liberal Democrats as he seeks a fairer and freer society.

As for James Bond... I would probably place him more in the conservative camp currently. He likes a luxury lifestyle, he doesn't really care about the warfare of others, however, he does feel a strong patriotic duty and favours heavy police/security enforcement, even though the Conservatives are failing on this front. However, under this, he could also be an advocate of 'New Labour' as seen under Tony Blair who did favour war.

---

Bond is a Tory, like the Queen.

Yes - the Queen is a Tory, but she'll support the current elected government, like Bond.

You are all shocked, yes?

As to Robin Hood - he'd vote for the English Democrats, the party of the English doomed never to be elected.

Hood doesn't represent disobedience to authority or re-distribution of wealth, he's an ethnic hero like Achilles or Cuculain, or King Arthur - or indeed King Alfred or Herewood the Wake. Unlike the others he's almost certainly fictional.

So, if there was an English version of Sien Fien he'd vote for them.

I love how innapropriate the thread title got after the tories won.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

I want to know how would Robin Hood vote, though. And especially Disney's fox version.

---

He wouldn't vote in parliamentary elections, but would run in local lections in Nottinghamshire - and would have a landslide victory.

Well, that is if you believe his agent, the BBC and carefully crafted polls.

I've joined the Labour party for £3 and I shall be voting for Corbyn. :creep:

http://labourlist.org/2015/07/where-...t-coming-from/

I joined Lib Dems for £1 to vote for Tim Farron. He would actually make a good British Prime-Minister.

Would be good if Labour shot themselves in the foot, and everyone realising the big difference Lib dems made in the coalition and have the votes swing their way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

I joined Lib Dems to vote for Tim Farron. He would actually make a good British Prime-Minister.

---

:laugh4:

Not as good as Corbyn though....

I love the fact that the Lib-Dems have a Baron as equalities minister. Surreal doesn't even cover it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

I love the fact that the Lib-Dems have a Baron as equalities minister. Surreal doesn't even cover it!

---

https://i.imgur.com/gDhJsmj.jpg

She was appointed in 2010. Also considering....
1) She is not white british
2) Not Christian (Muslim)
3) Pro-LBGT Rights
4) History of working in Equality initiatives.

It was a better choice than David Cameron's last two White British Christian anti-LBGT pickings with no prior history or experience in equality initiatives to be equalities minister.

Why should it matter if a candidate isn't white or christian?

BME candidates are generally more aware of the issues and discrimination, so make better sense to appoint than someone who has no real experience of discrimination.

Especially since the criticism against the person was that they were granted a peerage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

BME candidates are generally more aware of the issues and discrimination, so make better sense to appoint than someone who has no real experience of discrimination.

Especially since the criticism against the person was that they were granted a peerage.

---

Sorry but that's a racist statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Sorry but that's a racist statement.

---

No, it's an ignorant statement from someone who lives in an area that is not predominately white. These people are as shocked by white-on-white racism as they are by the rural drug problem - which is a very real thing and receives no attention nationally.

I somehow doubt that the baroness has much experience of being discriminated against.

Regardless, I fail to see the how experiencing discrimination is any real benefit, it is not generally considered valuable for a rape expert to have actual experience being raped, why would it here?
In fact I would think of it as a disadvantage as it is hard to imagine a victim being objective enough for effective decision making.

But that of course assumes that the baroness by the virtue of being non white has any meaningful experience of being discriminated against which, as our mentally challenged American Indian friend has noted, would be somewhat of a problematic assumption.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

BME candidates are generally more aware of the issues and discrimination, so make better sense to appoint than someone who has no real experience of discrimination.

Especially since the criticism against the person was that they were granted a peerage.

---

Sorry but that's a racist statement.

---

:laugh4: Okay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

No, it's an ignorant statement from someone who lives in an area that is not predominately white. These people are as shocked by white-on-white racism as they are by the rural drug problem - which is a very real thing and receives no attention nationally.

---

It is not an ignorant statement at all.

BME means "Black & Minority Ethnics", this title includes people of white-descent such as from Poland, Ireland, etc. You are trying to create a bug bear where there isn't one. It makes sense for someone with experience and from a discriminated against background to challenge these issues due to their greater degree of experience in these matters. Obviously there are other such expansions, like that there are other groupings such as Disabilities, LBGT, OAP... but these are usually appointed as sub-briefs by the minister.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

I love the fact that the Lib-Dems have a Baron as equalities minister. Surreal doesn't even cover it!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

I somehow doubt that the baroness has much experience of being discriminated against.

---

Though, I am still amused people keep picking on Ece's 'Baroness' title. She was born to immigrant parents, worked in many public initiatives, setting up domestic violence support groups for women of turkish and kurdish decent, worked in Race Equality Units, been appointed Minister for Equalities in the past, Worked on several Social and Health Care trust boards, she was awarded an Honorary Doctorate (DLitt) by Coventry University, for her work to promote equality for ethnic minorities in the UK. She got her peerage in 2010...

But yet "oh no, evil Baroness", you guys are being so Marxist, it is hilarious.


Now lets look at Nicky Morgan, the current Minister. Born and raised with silverspoon and private education up to Oxford and beyond. Zero experience in anything related to equalities before being appointed. Voted against the introduction of marriage for same sex couples... and that is pretty much it.


But clearly, the 'Baroness' is such a poor choice in your eyes!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

BME means "Black & Minority Ethnics", this title includes people of white-descent such as from Poland, Ireland, etc. You are trying to create a bug bear where there isn't one. It makes sense for someone with experience and from a discriminated against background to challenge these issues due to their greater degree of experience in these matters. Obviously there are other such expansions, like that there are other groupings such as Disabilities, LBGT, OAP... but these are usually appointed as sub-briefs by the minister.

---

My sister (from Devon, parents from the Home Counties) went to Bristol University, once some of the Public School kids realised she wasn't public schooled (a good upbringing can hide anything) she got the typical "oooh aaarrrh".

The other week I heard the students next door shouting "Zider, the main ingredient in Zider is ZIDER!" It went on, I won't elaborate, but it's a racist stereotype that all we do here is drink Cider and sell it to tourists, and talk in moronic accents.

That's to say nothing of the English/Scottish/Welsh thing.

Have you ever tried being "English" in another part of the UK instead of humbly British?

Lets look at the title "Black & Minority Ethnics" because it's not really appropriate - it should really be "AME" or "Asian and Minority Ethnics" because there are more than twice as many Asians in the UK as there are Blacks, and once you breaks "Black" down into "African" and "Caribbean" it becomes even more obvious that the largest percentage of non-Whites in the UK are from one area, the Indian Subcontinent.

So, overall, you're talking bollocks and you're demographically a decade or more out of date.

Your point is invalid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

Though, I am still amused people keep picking on Ece's 'Baroness' title. She was born to immigrant parents, worked in many public initiatives, setting up domestic violence support groups for women of turkish and kurdish decent, worked in Race Equality Units, been appointed Minister for Equalities in the past, Worked on several Social and Health Care trust boards, she was awarded an Honorary Doctorate (DLitt) by Coventry University, for her work to promote equality for ethnic minorities in the UK. She got her peerage in 2010...

But yet "oh no, evil Baroness", you guys are being so Marxist, it is hilarious.

---

My problem is with you presenting her lack of white christian-ness as an advantage against the others candidates, had you quoted her resume like that 2 posts earlier instead I wouldn't have commented.

Also Marxist? You don't need to be red to be distrustful of stories of oppression with the oppressed being nobility.

"But yet "oh no, evil Baroness", you guys are being so Marxist, it is hilarious." Explain the relation between being a Marxist (I am one) and the comment you described. Please. What is to be SO Marxist?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brenus

"But yet "oh no, evil Baroness", you guys are being so Marxist, it is hilarious." Explain the relation between being a Marxist (I am one) and the comment you described. Please. What is to be SO Marxist?

---

Class-warfare. To be 'SO' Marxist, it is taking the ideology to the extreme/exaggeration.

In this specific example, someone from an immigrant family worked hard in their life to promote equality, and it was felt that in 2010, she should be appointed to the House of Lords, and thus be a baroness. Because of this recent appointment, people have felt she is now disqualified from all her life-experience/merit because of the title.

Given my own ideology, it was humorous, since I am probably one of the most left leaning members in the backroom.

"In this specific example, someone from an immigrant family worked hard in their life to promote equality, and it was felt that in 2010, she should be appointed to the House of Lords, and thus be a baroness. Because of this recent appointment, people have felt she is now disqualified from all her life-experience/merit because of the title" I think is a perfect demo to prove some part of Marx's theory. Workers and Factories owners share the same goal (factories making money), then diverge when their "selfish" interests put them in opposition (sharing the profit).
In her case, worked hard to promote equality then accepted the tittle for personal satisfaction, shows how capitalism adapts and wins former opponents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Lets look at the title "Black & Minority Ethnics" because it's not really appropriate - it should really be "AME" or "Asian and Minority Ethnics" because there are more than twice as many Asians in the UK as there are Blacks, and once you breaks "Black" down into "African" and "Caribbean" it becomes even more obvious that the largest percentage of non-Whites in the UK are from one area, the Indian Subcontinent.

So, overall, you're talking bollocks and you're demographically a decade or more out of date.

---

or I am just using the term used in society and it is nothing to do with me personally? Storm Downing Street with your soapbox. it is nothing to do with me and your criticism of the term does nothing to change my point. :shrug:

You make an interesting point with it though, so kudos on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Regardless, I fail to see the how experiencing discrimination is any real benefit, it is not generally considered valuable for a rape expert to have actual experience being raped, why would it here?
In fact I would think of it as a disadvantage as it is hard to imagine a victim being objective enough for effective decision making.

---

Just like being able to count should disqualify someone from becoming finance minister since all these people who used to work for Golman Sachs and are then chosen to lead nations are inherently biased and not objective at all. Someone like a former factory worker should get that job. You know, someone who actually cares about the country and not about helping his former colleagues.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/bu...anted=all&_r=0
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...ld-873869.html

Your point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Your point?

---

Fully agree with you obviously.
Ministers should not have experience in the field they operate in because it makes them biased.

Then you didnt get my point at all.

A victim of a crime is less likely to be objective about the crime than someone who hasnt suffered it, a crime such as rape or discrimination can cause irrationality. Is it such problem to be a disqualifier here? No, but it is not a benefit as beskar tried to present it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Then you didnt get my point at all.

A victim of a crime is less likely to be objective about the crime than someone who hasnt suffered it. Is it such problem to be a disqualifier? No, but it is not a benefit as beskar tried to present it.

---

Yes, but when we want a finance minister, we usually expect the sort of experience from him that also makes him biased and see it as a benefit. Having been a banker might not traumatize you but the bias is there anyway since there are other strong factors that can cause it.
Having had only positive experiences with something does not make one neutral at all.

True, though the banker example is experience of the perpetrator not the victim; being a victim of discrimination wont give you knowledge how to prevent the crime. The ex-Goldman Sachs bankers likely have great insight in the field of bank fraud etc, it's just that they cant be trusted to actually use it beneficially.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

True, though the banker example is experience of the perpetrator not the victim; being a victim of discrimination wont give you knowledge how to prevent the crime. The ex-Goldman Sachs bankers likely have great insight in the field of bank fraud etc, it's just that they cant be trusted to actually use it beneficially.

---

Is the end result not similar?
And I would say as a victim you can learn quite a lot about how to prevent a crime, especially since most people will give you plenty of advice afterwards.

Name a finance minister who has run his own business and understands how the money supply works?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Name a finance minister who has run his own business and understands how the money supply works?

---

There was that time Alan Sugar did the business stuff for Gordan Brown. Not sure if you class that as him knowing how it works.