Brexit Thread

[Husar]

yet you describe sneeering contempt for the working class as a traditional tory trait?

Didn't he say that in reply to you?

As I understood his post, he said you have sneering contempt for the working class because you basically said they believe everything the politicians told them. That's even what I said in my reiteration that you quoted without correcting that part. So unless you're a Tory, we have now entered full misunderstanding mode.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Didn't he say that in reply to you?

As I understood his post, he said you have sneering contempt for the working class because you basically said they believe everything the politicians told them. That's even what I said in my reiteration that you quoted without correcting that part. So unless you're a Tory, we have now entered full misunderstanding mode.

He's projecting.

IA referred to what he sees at Legs' disdain for the working class, but because in Legs' mind this is a fault evidenced exclusively by the Right (and Tories) IA must be referring to himself, because IA is a Tory. IA has said he is not a Tory but because he's to the Right of Legs politically in Legs' mind he must be a Tory.

Basically, Legs is being closed minded and prejudiced.

[Legs]

He's projecting.

IA referred to what he sees at Legs' disdain for the working class, but because in Legs' mind this is a fault evidenced exclusively by the Right (and Tories) IA must be referring to himself, because IA is a Tory. IA has said he is not a Tory but because he's to the Right of Legs politically in Legs' mind he must be a Tory.

Basically, Legs is being closed minded and prejudiced.

Young man stop making yourself look like that.
When you are so completely lost it is perhaps better to stay quiet.

[Legs]

Didn't he say that in reply to you?

As I understood his post, he said you have sneering contempt for the working class because you basically said they believe everything the politicians told them. That's even what I said in my reiteration that you quoted without correcting that part. So unless you're a Tory, we have now entered full misunderstanding mode.

I can see why you are lost.
"sneering contempt for the working class" is the key.
You are only looking at one example of that phrase.
To exit misunderstanding mode find that phrase alluded to as a tory trait, identify Insane as the person who described it as such and then proceed normally.
Its quite easy, you don't even have to leave this referendum topic

[Husar]

I can see why you are lost.
"sneering contempt for the working class" is the key.
You are only looking at one example of that phrase.
To exit misunderstanding mode find that phrase alluded to as a tory trait, identify Insane as the person who described it as such and then proceed normally.
Its quite easy, you don't even have to leave this referendum topic

I assume you are talking about this then?
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053705276

In which case I may have completely misinterpreted IA's last statement of the sort and noone bothered to correct me.
I shall go cry in a corner over the time wasted and then consider whether a return to this topic is worth even more of my limited lifetime.

[Legs]

I assume you are talking about this then?
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...post2053705276

In which case I may have completely misinterpreted IA's last statement of the sort and noone bothered to correct me.
I shall go cry in a corner over the time wasted and then consider whether a return to this topic is worth even more of my limited lifetime.

So, is he saying I am a tory?

But what do you make of this.....
I think most of the people voting didn't have the faintest idea what they were voting for or against.
Some people probably thought they were voting to give millions of pounds to the NHS, I wonder how they felt when they were told the money was going to farmers instead?

Could you read that and come up with a response like....
He's projecting.

IA referred to what he sees at Legs' disdain for the working class, but because in Legs' mind this is a fault evidenced exclusively by the Right (and Tories) IA must be referring to himself, because IA is a Tory. IA has said he is not a Tory but because he's to the Right of Legs politically in Legs' mind he must be a Tory.

Basically, Legs is being closed minded and prejudiced.
Or is that just too crazy to imagine.

[Fragony]

What I just don't understand is that you insist on being unpleasant here when just having one coukd pay the rent. It's perfectly clear what was said.

[Husar]

So, is he saying I am a tory?

I have no idea what he was saying, it's like the entire forum is slowly turning into Fragonies. I think he just said he wants to be the only asshole here, but I'm really not sure.

But what do you make of this.....
I think most of the people voting didn't have the faintest idea what they were voting for or against.
Some people probably thought they were voting to give millions of pounds to the NHS, I wonder how they felt when they were told the money was going to farmers instead?

Could you read that and come up with a response like....
He's projecting.

IA referred to what he sees at Legs' disdain for the working class, but because in Legs' mind this is a fault evidenced exclusively by the Right (and Tories) IA must be referring to himself, because IA is a Tory. IA has said he is not a Tory but because he's to the Right of Legs politically in Legs' mind he must be a Tory.

Basically, Legs is being closed minded and prejudiced.
Or is that just too crazy to imagine.

PVC went with my apparently wrong interpretation of what IA said or interpreted it in the same way I did and tried to somehow make sense of it and what you said later. I'm going to guess that he also didn't remember what IA said three months ago, maybe IA himself didn't even remember.

His statement is also not directed at the part you quoted but at your later accusations against IA. It's not crazy, a bit mistaken perhaps, depending on who meant what.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think Legs should go and read IA on "Champagne Socialists" before he concludes that contempt for the Working Class is seen by our esteemed Lancastrian as a preserve of the Tories.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Do we need someone to shout "to the barricades!" or have somebody post a link to a good rendition of the "internationale?"

[Legs]

His statement is also not directed at the part you quoted but at your later accusations against IA. It's not crazy, a bit mistaken perhaps, depending on who meant what.

If that were true it would relate to later posts, can you find any relation to later posts at all?
Is any of the content of the posts in any way related to what he wrote?

[Husar]

If that were true it would relate to later posts, can you find any relation to later posts at all?
Is any of the content of the posts in any way related to what he wrote?

Yes.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I have no idea what he was saying, it's like the entire forum is slowly turning into Fragonies. I think he just said he wants to be the only asshole here, but I'm really not sure.



PVC went with my apparently wrong interpretation of what IA said or interpreted it in the same way I did and tried to somehow make sense of it and what you said later. I'm going to guess that he also didn't remember what IA said three months ago, maybe IA himself didn't even remember.

His statement is also not directed at the part you quoted but at your later accusations against IA. It's not crazy, a bit mistaken perhaps, depending on who meant what.

I think it's fairly clear IA was referring to the Left, or the rich part of it at any rate, when he said:

There you have it in a nutshell once again. The sneering contempt for the working classes.


Then again that's why they're against Grammar Schools, one can't have the hoi polloi thinking for themselves can one?

If his observation about 19th Century Tories has any bearing on the above it is to ironically observe that the roles of Left and Right have become inverted.

What I struggle to understand is why Legs is contorting himself trying to come up with another explanation other than what IA clearly meant. Given how he's resorted to responding to my points with nothing but abuse I fail to see why he can't just accept that IA meant what he did and hurl abuse at him too.

Unless asking him to quote primary sources in an argument over scripture has just engendered an irrational hatred of me specifically.