UK Politics Thread

[Pannonian]

https://order-order.com/2019/09/26/l...sive-language/

also: my previous point above. performative outrage.

After MPs have been threatened, their offices attacked, and their children threatened, your response is "You do it too." Was it performative outrage to receive death threats and have people attempting to break in whilst calling them traitor? What did Jo Swinson's daughter do to merit threats?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

How do you make money off of that? I really want to know. What kind of investments do you make? I know people make money from contracts when rebuilding a country like Iraq, but this isn't quite the same case. Maybe securing really crappy supply chain rights that they won't be able to fulfill?

The only other thing I can think of is security, for when Brexiters climb out and start wandering the shadows spouting out factoids about the racial composition of German-allied infantry in Africa and the Middle East during World War II or speaking Middle English to preserve their true heritage or something.

You act like the vile abuse of women on and offline is related to brexit.

It's actually related to overwrought keyboard warriors - which is why I've been lobbying for more civility around here.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...nd-jo-swinson/

Jezza less popular than Jo Swinson after Labour conference.

[Montmorency]

You act like the vile abuse of women on and offline is related to brexit.

It's actually related to overwrought keyboard warriors - which is why I've been lobbying for more civility around here.

The problem isn't lack of "civility," it's reactionary barbarians.

[CrossLOPER]

You act like the vile abuse of women on and offline is related to brexit.

It's actually related to overwrought keyboard warriors - which is why I've been lobbying for more civility around here.

It's kind of a part of it. The leaders of Brexit seem to be happy to enjoy the benefits of having imbeciles pick off their rivals without explicitly telling them to do so. Rhetoric matters, especially when you have eager listeners.

[Furunculus]

After MPs have been threatened, their offices attacked, and their children threatened, your response is "You do it too." Was it performative outrage to receive death threats and have people attempting to break in whilst calling them traitor? What did Jo Swinson's daughter do to merit threats?

no, my response is to treat politics desultory manner as if it is entertainment, and to bring the full weight of the law against those who incite and instigate or threaten violence.

https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/stat...57891444420609

but you don't get to pretend that we haven't always had an adversarial political system where opposing ideas are challenged rather than mediated upon.

[Pannonian]

You act like the vile abuse of women on and offline is related to brexit.

It's actually related to overwrought keyboard warriors - which is why I've been lobbying for more civility around here.

Both the PM and his chief of staff have hinted that the only way of stopping the abuse is to do what the government wants and pass Brexit. Well, in the case of Cummings it's less hinting and more explicit.

[Pannonian]

How do you make money off of that? I really want to know. What kind of investments do you make? I know people make money from contracts when rebuilding a country like Iraq, but this isn't quite the same case. Maybe securing really crappy supply chain rights that they won't be able to fulfill?

The only other thing I can think of is security, for when Brexiters climb out and start wandering the shadows spouting out factoids about the racial composition of German-allied infantry in Africa and the Middle East during World War II or speaking Middle English to preserve their true heritage or something.

A contract for difference (CFD) is a popular form of derivative trading. CFD trading enables you to speculate on the rising or falling prices of fast-moving global financial markets, such as forex, indices, commodities, shares and treasuries.

[rory_20_uk]

A contract for difference (CFD) is a popular form of derivative trading. CFD trading enables you to speculate on the rising or falling prices of fast-moving global financial markets, such as forex, indices, commodities, shares and treasuries.

Just like Black Friday when the UK crashed out of having a currency linked with Europe.

I guess that was such a success of course we'd go for more integration - when it again fails there's a fortune to be made.

[Pannonian]

Just like Black Friday when the UK crashed out of having a currency linked with Europe.

I guess that was such a success of course we'd go for more integration - when it again fails there's a fortune to be made.

So your response when shown that your Leave leaders are screwing you over for their profit is to blame the EU.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The problem isn't lack of "civility," it's reactionary barbarians.

So the problem isn't lack of civility so much as a reactionary lack of civility?

I stand by my point.

It's kind of a part of it. The leaders of Brexit seem to be happy to enjoy the benefits of having imbeciles pick off their rivals without explicitly telling them to do so. Rhetoric matters, especially when you have eager listeners.

You're right, rhetoric does matter. The most strident rhetoric came from Geoffrey Cox on Wednesday when he accused the opposition of being cowardly in refusing to the dissolution of the "dead parliament".

Yet we focus on Boris, still.

Nobody talks about all the "evil Tory" memes either.

I will say this though, the things Dominic Cummings has said, openly, are beyond the pale - especially for an unelected quack.

[rory_20_uk]

So your response when shown that your Leave leaders are screwing you over for their profit is to blame the EU.

LOL

They are not "my leaders", nor the leaders of those who wish to leave. They are the elected officials who supposedly carry out the wishes of the people. And that fiction is becoming all too evident.
I never blamed the EU, I gave a parallel so this could be predicted.

Do you find it difficult to understand simple statements?

[Montmorency]

no, my response is to treat politics desultory manner as if it is entertainment, and to bring the full weight of the law against those who incite and instigate or threaten violence.

Your response is a scummy one. I could never take a person seriously who professes such an attitude.

So the problem isn't lack of civility so much as a reactionary lack of civility?

I stand by my point.

No. That is exactly the wrong takeaway. When you say things like this it deeply disturbs me, because it creates the impression that a government could exterminate people like me and you would stand idly by as long as officials could deliver it with a facade of professional urbanity.

[CrossLOPER]

A contract for difference (CFD) is a popular form of derivative trading. CFD trading enables you to speculate on the rising or falling prices of fast-moving global financial markets, such as forex, indices, commodities, shares and treasuries.

So neckbeards who got tired of flipping things on the Steam marketplace are bullying BJ Brexkowicz so they can continue making imaginary money on an imaginary marketplace? Is that about the sum of it?

[Pannonian]

So neckbeards who got tired of flipping things on the Steam marketplace are bullying BJ Brexkowicz so they can continue making imaginary money on an imaginary marketplace? Is that about the sum of it?

And they're willing to screw the UK over for their moneymaking whizz.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No. That is exactly the wrong takeaway. When you say things like this it deeply disturbs me, because it creates the impression that a government could exterminate people like me and you would stand idly by as long as officials could deliver it with a facade of professional urbanity.

Urbanity is not civility, although neither is it piety.

I do not necessarily adhere to one virtue, however death threats, threats of violence, accusations of cowardice, accusations of treachery for holding certain opinions.... These things are uncivil.

If you think, kind, compassionate behaviours can be fostered without civility then I think you are sadly mistaken.

I think my point is born out by your use of the word "barbarian" which is the antonym of "civilised".

[Montmorency]

Urbanity is not civility, although neither is it piety.

I do not necessarily adhere to one virtue, however death threats, threats of violence, accusations of cowardice, accusations of treachery for holding certain opinions.... These things are uncivil.

If you think, kind, compassionate behaviours can be fostered without civility then I think you are sadly mistaken.

I think my point is born out by your use of the word "barbarian" which is the antonym of "civilised".

Kind, compassionate behaviors cannot be fostered among certain ideologies, period. Their only value and content is sadism. This has nothing to do with performative civility.

[Furunculus]

Your response is a scummy one. I could never take a person seriously who professes such an attitude.

I am endlessly curious to know why you come to this conclusion:

It surely cannot be my conviction that we must to bring the full weight of the law against those who incite and instigate or threaten violence!
Is it perhaps because i refuse to treat politics with the personal commitment and solemnity of a religious zealot, choosing instead to treat politcs as a hobby - as one might horse racing?

Do tell, me old mucker. ;)

[CrossLOPER]

choosing instead to treat politcs as a hobby

I struggle to find a place to begin, in describing what is wrong with this sentiment. Morally and socially, it is abdicating responsibility. It's the "I was only pretending to be retarded" approach for politics when something bad happens as a result of rhetoric or policy.

[Furunculus]

Oh dear lord above, you misunderstand the situation entirely!

On a personal level i hold my own values, assiduously seek parties that meet those values, interrogate those parties mercilessly to expose flaws, and constantly reevaluate whether those parties are worthy of my support.

But here, here we do something different: we discuss politics and the values that inform those politics. There would be nothing more tedious than me zelously and earnestly trying to convert you to the 'true' cause. And nothing more tedious for me than you giving me a swivel eyed spiel on why you follow the one true god. So yes, i attempt to get the most out of my hobby by being dispassionate, not least because there is no 'right' answer - just trade offs.

Anyone who tells me that brexit is morally bankrupt is a complete plank, and i would not presume to believe the same in reverse. Saying such would only reveal the utterer as a one dimensional mouthpiece for other peoples ambitions. In which case respecting the value set that informs other peoples choices requires dispassionate discussion .

And a desultory or louche persona is less offenzive that the zealot.

Would you like to continue in explaining how bad i am as a human being?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Kind, compassionate behaviors cannot be fostered among certain ideologies, period. Their only value and content is sadism. This has nothing to do with performative civility.

This is why you change the ideology with kindness and compassion, and civility.

A little while ago you accused me of being "colder" but perhaps the change in perspective is yours?

[Pannonian]

This is why you change the ideology with kindness and compassion, and civility.

A little while ago you accused me of being "colder" but perhaps the change in perspective is yours?

Does logic and evidence-based argument come into it? Ie. can we look at things from an engineering perspective, rather than from a philosophical perspective?

[Montmorency]

Oh dear lord above, you misunderstand the situation entirely!

On a personal level i hold my own values, assiduously seek parties that meet those values, interrogate those parties mercilessly to expose flaws, and constantly reevaluate whether those parties are worthy of my support.

But here, here we do something different: we discuss politics and the values that inform those politics. There would be nothing more tedious than me zelously and earnestly trying to convert you to the 'true' cause. And nothing more tedious for me than you giving me a swivel eyed spiel on why you follow the one true god. So yes, i attempt to get the most out of my hobby by being dispassionate, not least because there is no 'right' answer - just trade offs.

Anyone who tells me that brexit is morally bankrupt is a complete plank, and i would not presume to believe the same in reverse. Saying such would only reveal the utterer as a one dimensional mouthpiece for other peoples ambitions. In which case respecting the value set that informs other peoples choices requires dispassionate discussion .

And a desultory or louche persona is less offenzive that the zealot.

Would you like to continue in explaining how bad i am as a human being?

It's basically insulting. Either you hold no meaningful convictions worth discussion, or you do and you want to preserve your comfort by preemptively insulating yourself.

The offensive part is holding your inevitably tendentious values - which you evidently do take very seriously - and pretending they are beyond challenge because you consider yourself "dispassionate" or because politics is like a "horse race" to you. But the variance in premises and trade-offs is enormous, and the difference in effect is enormous. Politics trades in lives, and it feel as though you want to put value in your values while glibly assuring anyone who disagrees that it's all the same in the end, like a preference in consumer media. You can't have it both ways.

It's easier to respect someone who owns their thumos rather than trolling with it.

This is why you change the ideology with kindness and compassion, and civility.

A little while ago you accused me of being "colder" but perhaps the change in perspective is yours?

In reality, the typically available option is to overpower it. I cannot think of a time in history where kindness, compassion, and civility negotiated social tensions or resolved a crisis (above the individual level).

There is one kernel of truth here though. We are proceeding through a global sacred war for humanity. In any world that averts apocalypse and dystopia, the Right must be eradicated irrevocably. History shows that total war never total, so this is certainly impossible - without the cooperation of many on the Right. In a sense, our fates rest in the hands of people like you.

[Pannonian]

It's basically insulting. Either you hold no meaningful convictions worth discussion, or you do and you want to preserve your comfort by preemptively insulating yourself.

The offensive part is holding your inevitably tendentious values - which you evidently do take very seriously - and pretending they are beyond challenge because you consider yourself "dispassionate" or because politics is like a "horse race" to you. But the variance in premises and trade-offs is enormous, and the difference in effect is enormous. Politics trades in lives, and it feel as though you want to put value in your values while glibly assuring anyone who disagrees that it's all the same in the end, like a preference in consumer media. You can't have it both ways.

It's easier to respect someone who owns their thumos rather than trolling with it.



In reality, the typically available option is to overpower it. I cannot think of a time in history where kindness, compassion, and civility negotiated social tensions or resolved a crisis (above the individual level).

There is one kernel of truth here though. We are proceeding through a global sacred war for humanity. In any world that averts apocalypse and dystopia, the Right must be eradicated irrevocably. History shows that total war never total, so this is certainly impossible - without the cooperation of many on the Right. In a sense, our fates rest in the hands of people like you.

Civil discourse starts with a reasonably common set of values, around which details may be debated. One cannot initiate a revolution with philosophical arguments that cannot be challenged, then expect civil discourse to restart from this new basis.

For leavers, I offer this assertion: the engineering method is the best way of achieving a solution. Do you agree?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Oh dear lord above, you misunderstand the situation entirely!

On a personal level i hold my own values, assiduously seek parties that meet those values, interrogate those parties mercilessly to expose flaws, and constantly reevaluate whether those parties are worthy of my support.

But here, here we do something different: we discuss politics and the values that inform those politics. There would be nothing more tedious than me zelously and earnestly trying to convert you to the 'true' cause. And nothing more tedious for me than you giving me a swivel eyed spiel on why you follow the one true god. So yes, i attempt to get the most out of my hobby by being dispassionate, not least because there is no 'right' answer - just trade offs.

Anyone who tells me that brexit is morally bankrupt is a complete plank, and i would not presume to believe the same in reverse. Saying such would only reveal the utterer as a one dimensional mouthpiece for other peoples ambitions. In which case respecting the value set that informs other peoples choices requires dispassionate discussion .

And a desultory or louche persona is less offenzive that the zealot.

Would you like to continue in explaining how bad i am as a human being?

Quite - though you might have done better to describe the "discussion" of politics as a hobby.

It's also worth pointing out that we also benefit from greater understanding of each other, even if that doesn't lead to agreement.

[Pannonian]

Quite - though you might have done better to describe the "discussion" of politics as a hobby.

It's also worth pointing out that we also benefit from greater understanding of each other, even if that doesn't lead to agreement.

Hobbies begin with a state of comfort and leisure. Hobby clubs begin with a collection of people with a central premise they can broadly agree on. If you smash the central premise and resist all arguments to return to that previous state, what basis is there for the hobby club to continue?

[Pannonian]

Shortly after 1pm on Friday, detectives left the ground-floor offices of the Labour MP for Dewsbury. After talking to Paula Sherriff for more than an hour, West Yorkshire police launched three separate investigations into death threats made against her. All are linked to the fallout from Sherriff’s exchange with Boris Johnson in the Commons on Wednesday night.

...

Amid the hate, one theme emerged: many of the abusers were mimicking the language of the prime minister. “People are parroting his words in the emails we are getting: ‘you voted for the Surrender Act’, ‘capitulation’. People are so angry, and the fact that we have a prime minister who is deliberately stoking up this toxic atmosphere is beyond irresponsible.”

Another theme that swiftly became apparent in the abusive messages was an undisguised hatred for women. Sherriff estimates that 70% of the callers are misogynistic, many inquiring about her menstrual cycle or accusing her of being “hysterical”.

Such experiences are shared five miles up the Spen valley in the village of Gomersal, in the constituency offices of Labour MP Tracy Brabin. She joined the fray last week, reminding Johnson that “words have consequences”.

Few MPs are more qualified to make that point: Brabin took over as MP for Batley and Spen after the death of Cox, who was murdered by a local resident a few days before the EU referendum.

Cox’s murder remains raw for many in this post-industrial corner of West Yorkshire and some believe Johnson’s approach is agitating uncomfortable emotions. Since the Commons exchanges on Wednesday, Brabin’s office has received four times the amount of abuse it would normally expect, the MP says. Cox was murdered outside a nearby library, where she was about to hold a constituency surgery, and already police have advised Brabin that she requires police protection. “We’ve had a number of malicious phone calls and we are going to have to have a police presence in our surgery. We’ve had a load of shite that we don’t normally get,” said the 58-year-old.

...

Of broader concern is what Brabin and Sherriff describe as an emboldening of the far right in their community. On 12 October the far-right anti-Islam group the Yorkshire Patriots are due to march through Dewsbury in one of the first far-right demonstrations in the area since Cox was murdered. It is an upsetting development for both MPs, whose constituencies include significant Muslim populations. “There really is a growing far-right problem around here,” said Sherriff.

Other sources of concern shared by both MPs include what they describe as the prime minister’s questionable attitude towards women. “We have to get it across to people that he is not a champion for women,” said Brabin.

Yet both know that another bruising week in Westminster may have dissuaded future female parliamentary candidates from stepping forward. Sherriff said one female MP had already told her she would not be standing at the next election because of the level of abuse.

“How can I go to high schools around here and say: ‘Become an MP, it’s amazing’? I want to encourage girls to follow suit, but what if they ask: ‘I am worried about being safe?’”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...johnson-brexit

A PM encouraging physical threats to intimidate opponents into giving up. Where's the basis for civil discourse?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

In reality, the typically available option is to overpower it. I cannot think of a time in history where kindness, compassion, and civility negotiated social tensions or resolved a crisis (above the individual level).

There is one kernel of truth here though. We are proceeding through a global sacred war for humanity. In any world that averts apocalypse and dystopia, the Right must be eradicated irrevocably. History shows that total war never total, so this is certainly impossible - without the cooperation of many on the Right. In a sense, our fates rest in the hands of people like you.

Hmmm.

Spread of Christianity, end of slavery, Indian Independence, Civil Rights Movement - all accomplished their goals largely through compassionate argument, not violence. None of these examples are perfect, of course, but then humans are hardly perfect.

A few posts back you implied I would support a Fascist regime if it were sufficiently "Urbane", now you say "the Right" must be "eradicated irrevocably". Who, exactly is the totalitarian, here?

I will not give up my civility, my compassion, my belief in human goodness or my God - you'll have to kill me. How many skulls will you need to build your promised land, I wonder? Finally, I will make this point - there is no sacred war - all human conflict is evil - under all circumstances. Sometimes we do evil things to avert greater evils but we should not kid ourselves. The road to Hell has ever been paved with good intentions.

At least now I know why you disdain good manners, you consider them evil.

How sad.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Hobbies begin with a state of comfort and leisure. Hobby clubs begin with a collection of people with a central premise they can broadly agree on. If you smash the central premise and resist all arguments to return to that previous state, what basis is there for the hobby club to continue?

Is this another "Brexit is evil, you're evil" argument?

If you believe that, justify the impoverishment of Greece.

[Montmorency]

Hmmm.

Spread of Christianity, end of slavery, Indian Independence, Civil Rights Movement - all accomplished their goals largely through compassionate argument, not violence. None of these examples are perfect, of course, but then humans are hardly perfect.

Spread of Christianity, like the spread of Islam, was imposed on subject populations from the top down by converted local grandees and princes, when it wasn't spread by the sword. The case for 20th-21st century conversion processes is a little better, but it's funded by big money (and, incidentally, many far-right organizations), so appealing to "compassionate argument" sounds euphemistic.

Indian independence and the American civil rights movement were professedly non-violent, not civil. If you examine their conduct, you would absolutely recognize them as uncivil - many contemporaries did. You make a big mistake invoking these.

End of slavery especially, that involved bloody war and state coercion. Before that it involved vociferous public declamation, heated debate, and mob politics.

Your examples contradict your position like 90% of the way.

A few posts back you implied I would support a Fascist regime if it were sufficiently "Urbane", now you say "the Right" must be "eradicated irrevocably". Who, exactly is the totalitarian, here?

I will not give up my civility, my compassion, my belief in human goodness or my God - you'll have to kill me. How many skulls will you need to build your promised land, I wonder? Finally, I will make this point - there is no sacred war - all human conflict is evil - under all circumstances. Sometimes we do evil things to avert greater evils but we should not kid ourselves. The road to Hell has ever been paved with good intentions.

You've got it all wrong, I'm not the one offering revolution - the Right are. They're the ones bringing the knife to our throats. All most on the Left ever wanted was a bit more social spending and responsibility, but the Right have recklessly escalated toward dissolving liberal democracy outright. What's worse, they've been working at it for generations, ever since social democracy's ascent, for some even since 1789 or 1517. They hate us for our freedoms pretty much. As I am not a Christian, I don't offer the other cheek. Well, I personally would go meekly, but that doesn't mean others should.

This is a mere evaluation of the forces acting on our world. Civilizational crisis, if not collapse, is overdetermined; a new equilibrium will come to replace the world we have known. The Right is presently on the attack - one sick fuck has referred to it as a "Warsaw ghetto uprising" - and it's bound to get much much worse before it gets better. I say they must be eradicated because there is no reason to believe they will ever stop erupting as a permanent fifth column against the species. Your demographic will play a critical role, it's just a certainty. The Left can't build enough democratic power on its own. If I may allude to American context, it's very unlikely that either socialism or liberalism can (peacefully) defeat the Ahmaris and Trumps without the compliance and preferably allegiance of the Frenchs.

This is about much more than elections mind you. I can only hope you will come to see things more clearly as the world environment deteriorates.

At least now I know why disdain good manners, you consider them evil.

How sad.

No, I think evil people use them as a convenient facade that they don't even respect themselves, and that those who lecture on civility are all too often seeking to impose their advantage through subordination of perceived inferiors. For my part I maintain civility contextually as I judge proper. I perceive my own standards on the Org as generally appropriate, for example, and try to accommodate individual interlocutors' standards as needed.