Snap General Election called

User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

I made myself watch Yaxley-Lennon's speech from the 13th Sept rally because someone I know said that she was there and heard not one racist/anti immigrant/fascist remark, despite being a Lithuanian immigrant herself. Perhaps it was a different rally :| .

Anyway, it was sort of interesting to see what Y-L had to say (or croak, as he was losing his voice).

Basically, after lying that it was the biggest demo in Britain's history, and saying things like we are strong and the government is trembling, the only thing he did was complain about immigrants. Particularly Somalians, Afghans and Pakistanis. Then he just got all the flags of the UK out in succession for a cheer. Oh yeah, and one sneaky referenece to 'globalist' something or other.

Also, he and his flag wavers had some kind of cross symbol on their sleeves. Where the Nazis wore their swastikas. I'm sure it wasn't anything fascistic.
User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

I've probably confused the hell out of my YouTube algorithm :shock: . With its usual subtlety I expect to be seeing far-right suggestions amongst my usual mix of far left, sci-fi, maths and literature.
User avatar
Which Tyler
Posts: 7164
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 8:43 pm
Location: Tewkesbury
Contact:

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Which Tyler »

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 6:33 pm I've probably confused the hell out of my YouTube algorithm :shock: . With its usual subtlety I expect to be seeing far-right suggestions amongst my usual mix of far left, sci-fi, maths and literature.
Private browsing isn't just for porn
User avatar
Sandydragon
Site Admin
Posts: 10501
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Sandydragon »

Puja wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:40 am
Stom wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:32 am Someone needs to be a populist, and loudly talk about the actual issues, and ignore or sidestep every single question about migrants, trans rights, wars, etc. They need to be vocal, loud, and heavily criticize the political class who have allowed this situation to happen.


Puja
The Greens appear to be backing the idea of leaving Nato. Student union politics.
User avatar
Sandydragon
Site Admin
Posts: 10501
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Sandydragon »

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:47 am
Puja wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:34 am
Sandydragon wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 8:26 am Corbyn came closest. Yet despite the Parliamentary Labour Party actively briefing against him throughout the election, a concerted media campaign to smear and denigrate him, his problematic past positions, a massively reported-on anti-Semitism scandal, and his own ineptness at leadership and public communicatons, he took over 40% of the vote, a full 7% more than Starmer achieved during a complete Tory implosion.
FTFY. :D

It seems weird to say adamently, "The British electorate won't vote for socialism" using Corbyn as the example - for one thing, 'socialism' nowadays is 'completely centrist politics' from 15-20 years ago and the policies themselves poll incredibly well, much better than the current centrist "more austerity, but better this time."

Puja
Yes, I was going to say something along those lines - the Labour party machinery working for Corbyn?? :lol: The Blairites preferred to sabotage him from within - better for them to lose the election than to have a left wing PM.

Corbyn was the only major party leader in more than 30 years to offer socialism - his falling short of victory hardly proves the country wouldn't vote for it.
Yep. All those activists at a local level and the life long Labour voters. The money, the infrastructure etc etc etc.

And still he lost despite the Glastonbury chants. He had everything in his favour and still couldn’t get a majority.
User avatar
Sandydragon
Site Admin
Posts: 10501
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:13 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Sandydragon »

Stom wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:32 am
Sandydragon wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 8:26 am
Puja wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 1:11 am

Mind, we would've said that about Reform not too long ago.

Puja
They have 5 MPs despite significant public support over the past decade. The implosion of the Tories drove many to reform, Labour is nowhere near that bad, despite the best efforts of the media to portray them that way and fickle supporters.

The reality check is that the uk won’t vote in enough numbers for the Greens, particularly with their new direction. If anything, it will motivate voters to support the party most likely to stop them.

Corbyn came closest. Yet despite the Labour Party machinery, Momentum and a Tory PM who was both hated and a very poor campaigner, and who pissed off her core support just before the election, he failed.

As things stand the next PM will be Starmer or Farage. Time for some grown up politics to keep Reform out of power.
As usual, I think you’re completely wrong there.

“Grown up politics” is what got us in this mess in the first place.

Someone needs to be a populist, and loudly talk about the actual issues, and ignore or sidestep every single question about migrants, trans rights, wars, etc. They need to be vocal, loud, and heavily criticize the political class who have allowed this situation to happen.

Because that’s what reform do and other alt right agitators, and they’re correct. Just they also promote racist, fascist rhetoric. So don’t. Just talk policy, talk situations, talk solutions. And ensure the message is clear and easy to understand:

Doctor waiting times are insane. We need to be able to attract more doctors and cut down paperwork, here is an idea.

The tax system is working against you. We want working people to have more money in their pockets. We want families who have built themselves up to not need to face crippling tax bills, but we also need to spend. So we cut corruption by slashing Whitehall budgets for assistants, stopping the corruption by local government: just look at how much of your money reform have spent on employing family members. In this one council alone, they stole £250.000 of your money, money that could have been spent on fixing potholes, fixing the school roof, hiring an extra few staff at the clinic so you get seen quicker.

That’s what’s needed.

Call out the corruption directly. Don’t worry about stepping on feet. Burn all political bridges. The game is rigged. It doesn’t work by being a “grown up” it works by playing dirty. Without the bigoted rhetoric.
Nope.

Why are you listing a populist party along side the establishment. Reform are populists yet there they are governing badly. No surprise there and they would be a disaster at a national level. So too would the student union style politics of the greens and the left more widely. Without growth which Starmer is struggling to get his head around, there is no money for any of the projects that will improve people’s lives.

Waiting times are insane in parts of the country. So how about we look at ideas to fund the NHS better which might not be just about increasing taxation for everyone. Waiting times were coming down under the Blair government, so woe who grasped that you needed a better economy to support better services.

I fully agree that politicians need to stand up against the worst of the right wing rhetoric about immigrants. Note it’s not racist to talk about immigration in general and that’s the mistake many on the left have made previously and alienated people along the way. But opposing the worst of the anti immigrant propaganda doesn’t mean ignore the issue all together.
User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

Which Tyler wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 11:32 pm
Son of Mathonwy wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 6:33 pm I've probably confused the hell out of my YouTube algorithm :shock: . With its usual subtlety I expect to be seeing far-right suggestions amongst my usual mix of far left, sci-fi, maths and literature.
Private browsing isn't just for porn
Actually, the algorithm was smart enough to see this as an aberration. Normally I look at one thing and every third video suggested is a carbon copy. This time I got away with it.
User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

Sandydragon wrote: Sun Oct 05, 2025 9:12 am
Son of Mathonwy wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:47 am
Puja wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:34 am

FTFY. :D

It seems weird to say adamently, "The British electorate won't vote for socialism" using Corbyn as the example - for one thing, 'socialism' nowadays is 'completely centrist politics' from 15-20 years ago and the policies themselves poll incredibly well, much better than the current centrist "more austerity, but better this time."

Puja
Yes, I was going to say something along those lines - the Labour party machinery working for Corbyn?? :lol: The Blairites preferred to sabotage him from within - better for them to lose the election than to have a left wing PM.

Corbyn was the only major party leader in more than 30 years to offer socialism - his falling short of victory hardly proves the country wouldn't vote for it.
Yep. All those activists at a local level and the life long Labour voters. The money, the infrastructure etc etc etc.

And still he lost despite the Glastonbury chants. He had everything in his favour and still couldn’t get a majority.
If you're still saying he had everything in his favour you haven't been reading anything we've been saying.

Corbyn has many flaws. These and many things working against him, within his party, in the media and the electoral system itself, meant that he fell short of victory (although he did rob the Tories of their majority).

The single example in more than 30 years of a left-wing leader failing to gain a majority doesn't remotely mean that left-wing politics can't be popular or can't work in government.
User avatar
Puja
Site Admin
Posts: 11551
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Puja »

Sandydragon wrote: Sun Oct 05, 2025 9:09 am
Puja wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:40 am
Stom wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:32 am Someone needs to be a populist, and loudly talk about the actual issues, and ignore or sidestep every single question about migrants, trans rights, wars, etc. They need to be vocal, loud, and heavily criticize the political class who have allowed this situation to happen.


Puja
The Greens appear to be backing the idea of leaving Nato. Student union politics.
Surely student union politics would be something like looking at a headline and forming an opinion on a subject without actually understanding any of the detail, because the headline and initial impression matches your pre-existing bias.

Polanski is in favour of leaving NATO, yes, on the basis that the US aren't a reliable partner and haven't been for a long time, so having our entire defence plan be based around an alliance that relies on them is foolishness. If you listen to what he actually says, it's not "let's leave NATO tomorrow; I'm sure it'll be fine, wheeee!" but instead "Let's form alternate regional defensive alliances and pacts to replace NATO, because it is getting steadily less fit for purpose."

But it is probably easier to just not think and assume he's an imbecile because you've already made up your mind that Greens are "student union politics".

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 3381
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Stom »

Sandydragon wrote: Sun Oct 05, 2025 9:19 am
Stom wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:32 am
Sandydragon wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 8:26 am
They have 5 MPs despite significant public support over the past decade. The implosion of the Tories drove many to reform, Labour is nowhere near that bad, despite the best efforts of the media to portray them that way and fickle supporters.

The reality check is that the uk won’t vote in enough numbers for the Greens, particularly with their new direction. If anything, it will motivate voters to support the party most likely to stop them.

Corbyn came closest. Yet despite the Labour Party machinery, Momentum and a Tory PM who was both hated and a very poor campaigner, and who pissed off her core support just before the election, he failed.

As things stand the next PM will be Starmer or Farage. Time for some grown up politics to keep Reform out of power.
As usual, I think you’re completely wrong there.

“Grown up politics” is what got us in this mess in the first place.

Someone needs to be a populist, and loudly talk about the actual issues, and ignore or sidestep every single question about migrants, trans rights, wars, etc. They need to be vocal, loud, and heavily criticize the political class who have allowed this situation to happen.

Because that’s what reform do and other alt right agitators, and they’re correct. Just they also promote racist, fascist rhetoric. So don’t. Just talk policy, talk situations, talk solutions. And ensure the message is clear and easy to understand:

Doctor waiting times are insane. We need to be able to attract more doctors and cut down paperwork, here is an idea.

The tax system is working against you. We want working people to have more money in their pockets. We want families who have built themselves up to not need to face crippling tax bills, but we also need to spend. So we cut corruption by slashing Whitehall budgets for assistants, stopping the corruption by local government: just look at how much of your money reform have spent on employing family members. In this one council alone, they stole £250.000 of your money, money that could have been spent on fixing potholes, fixing the school roof, hiring an extra few staff at the clinic so you get seen quicker.

That’s what’s needed.

Call out the corruption directly. Don’t worry about stepping on feet. Burn all political bridges. The game is rigged. It doesn’t work by being a “grown up” it works by playing dirty. Without the bigoted rhetoric.
Nope.

Why are you listing a populist party along side the establishment. Reform are populists yet there they are governing badly. No surprise there and they would be a disaster at a national level. So too would the student union style politics of the greens and the left more widely. Without growth which Starmer is struggling to get his head around, there is no money for any of the projects that will improve people’s lives.

Waiting times are insane in parts of the country. So how about we look at ideas to fund the NHS better which might not be just about increasing taxation for everyone. Waiting times were coming down under the Blair government, so woe who grasped that you needed a better economy to support better services.

I fully agree that politicians need to stand up against the worst of the right wing rhetoric about immigrants. Note it’s not racist to talk about immigration in general and that’s the mistake many on the left have made previously and alienated people along the way. But opposing the worst of the anti immigrant propaganda doesn’t mean ignore the issue all together.
I can fall back on what is happening/what happened in Hungarian politics to show an example.

In Hungary, there is a party of a former PM. He was the leader, and he passed it on to his wife. I am friends with a high profile MP and leading light from one of the major left leaning parties, and I told him almost a decade ago that, in order to win an election, the opposition needed to "kill off" this former PM's party before going after the government. Because the government would just use them as bogeymen against them. First thing that Peter Magyar did when starting his movement was to rail against this former PM's party and basically wipe them out. And then, suddenly, the government has no stick to beat him with. No Soros, no migrants (he doesn't talk about it), no Pride (he didn't get involved), no former PM.

A winning party needs to distance itself from Reform, it needs to distance itself from Labour, the Tories, the Lib Dems, and the Greens. And that is the only way.

And by being populist, I mean by talking like one. Using the language of the people, not the language of politics. Not talking about difficult political decisions, but talking about making the policy work, and that's it. Having a core of policies and not getting sidetracked with other details (like NATO, for one).

As for growth...that is simply not true. Growth in and of itself does nothing. The economy has been "growing" in recent years, yet small businesses, spend at supermarkets, basically any spending on non-luxury goods and non-tech companies, have fallen. Because the real driver of a successful economy, and the real driver of public services and society as a whole, is how much disposable income the average person has to spend.

If the top 5% have more than ever, but they're spending it all on luxury goods owned by companies/individuals from outside the country...are you really growing the economy? Despite growth being high?

Or if the bottom 5% have actually got some money to spend and are going down their local high street and buying British beef again, instead of going to Lidl and getting imported meat for half the cost because they simply cannot afford to shop local?

You need the little man to spend to have a successful society. Blair was in charge of a booming economy by luck more than judgement. It was the "golden era" of the post-capitalist world, where the wealth was in the process of being redistributed to the super rich rather than actually all in their hands already. He got lucky. And so did Cameron. And their actions, and their political beliefs, and their self-serving nature led us to what we have now.

They got rich(er) off the backs of policies designed to enrich themselves and their friends, and we do not stand up and call them traitors, treasonists, and demand that they give their ill gotten gains back to the people of the United Kingdom.

Why the hell there isn't a party emblazoning billboards with what Hunt did around the 7 flats, I do not know.

THAT is what I mean by populist. Highlighting how all these parties have stood up and committed fraud against the British people. Highlighting how they have got rich off their time in office. And lumping Reform into them. Highlighting the spend of Farage.

But NOT getting involved in social issues.

So, yeah. That
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 3381
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Stom »

Puja wrote: Sun Oct 05, 2025 6:28 pm
Sandydragon wrote: Sun Oct 05, 2025 9:09 am
Puja wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:40 am



Puja
The Greens appear to be backing the idea of leaving Nato. Student union politics.
Surely student union politics would be something like looking at a headline and forming an opinion on a subject without actually understanding any of the detail, because the headline and initial impression matches your pre-existing bias.

Polanski is in favour of leaving NATO, yes, on the basis that the US aren't a reliable partner and haven't been for a long time, so having our entire defence plan be based around an alliance that relies on them is foolishness. If you listen to what he actually says, it's not "let's leave NATO tomorrow; I'm sure it'll be fine, wheeee!" but instead "Let's form alternate regional defensive alliances and pacts to replace NATO, because it is getting steadily less fit for purpose."

But it is probably easier to just not think and assume he's an imbecile because you've already made up your mind that Greens are "student union politics".

Puja
The thing is...he has a valid point...

It's an interesting debating topic. Would it win them a single new vote? No. Can it turn people off of them? Absolutely.

It's imbecilic. There is no potential upside. Seriously, right now I don't care what Magyar's actual political ideology is (I probably disagree with him in the main), but he's the only politician I've seen who has actually played the game to win against this rhetoric.
User avatar
Puja
Site Admin
Posts: 11551
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Puja »

Stom wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 9:37 am
Puja wrote: Sun Oct 05, 2025 6:28 pm
Sandydragon wrote: Sun Oct 05, 2025 9:09 am

The Greens appear to be backing the idea of leaving Nato. Student union politics.
Surely student union politics would be something like looking at a headline and forming an opinion on a subject without actually understanding any of the detail, because the headline and initial impression matches your pre-existing bias.

Polanski is in favour of leaving NATO, yes, on the basis that the US aren't a reliable partner and haven't been for a long time, so having our entire defence plan be based around an alliance that relies on them is foolishness. If you listen to what he actually says, it's not "let's leave NATO tomorrow; I'm sure it'll be fine, wheeee!" but instead "Let's form alternate regional defensive alliances and pacts to replace NATO, because it is getting steadily less fit for purpose."

But it is probably easier to just not think and assume he's an imbecile because you've already made up your mind that Greens are "student union politics".

Puja
The thing is...he has a valid point...

It's an interesting debating topic. Would it win them a single new vote? No. Can it turn people off of them? Absolutely.

It's imbecilic. There is no potential upside. Seriously, right now I don't care what Magyar's actual political ideology is (I probably disagree with him in the main), but he's the only politician I've seen who has actually played the game to win against this rhetoric.
I would argue that the upside is that Trump is largely detested in this country and there are votes to be earned for the Greens from the voters grimacing at the sight of Starmer and Lammy licking Trump's balls, by putting forward policies that propose more independence and distance from the US.

Having said that, it's also not official Green policy (yet), but Polanski's previously publically stated opinion, which has only come up because the media are digging to try and find things to smear him with (other than, "Haha, he engaged with a Sun article during his previous career as a hypnotherapist and they made him look like an idiot!") and he's had to answer questions about it in every single interview.

Plus, I don't mind a politician having beliefs and morals, even ones I don't believe in myself (as long as not crossing any of my red lines). Just "playing the game" and "talk less, smile more" is what gave us Starmer.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 3381
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Stom »

Puja wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:13 am
Stom wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 9:37 am
Puja wrote: Sun Oct 05, 2025 6:28 pm

Surely student union politics would be something like looking at a headline and forming an opinion on a subject without actually understanding any of the detail, because the headline and initial impression matches your pre-existing bias.

Polanski is in favour of leaving NATO, yes, on the basis that the US aren't a reliable partner and haven't been for a long time, so having our entire defence plan be based around an alliance that relies on them is foolishness. If you listen to what he actually says, it's not "let's leave NATO tomorrow; I'm sure it'll be fine, wheeee!" but instead "Let's form alternate regional defensive alliances and pacts to replace NATO, because it is getting steadily less fit for purpose."

But it is probably easier to just not think and assume he's an imbecile because you've already made up your mind that Greens are "student union politics".

Puja
The thing is...he has a valid point...

It's an interesting debating topic. Would it win them a single new vote? No. Can it turn people off of them? Absolutely.

It's imbecilic. There is no potential upside. Seriously, right now I don't care what Magyar's actual political ideology is (I probably disagree with him in the main), but he's the only politician I've seen who has actually played the game to win against this rhetoric.
I would argue that the upside is that Trump is largely detested in this country and there are votes to be earned for the Greens from the voters grimacing at the sight of Starmer and Lammy licking Trump's balls, by putting forward policies that propose more independence and distance from the US.

Having said that, it's also not official Green policy (yet), but Polanski's previously publically stated opinion, which has only come up because the media are digging to try and find things to smear him with (other than, "Haha, he engaged with a Sun article during his previous career as a hypnotherapist and they made him look like an idiot!") and he's had to answer questions about it in every single interview.

Plus, I don't mind a politician having beliefs and morals, even ones I don't believe in myself (as long as not crossing any of my red lines). Just "playing the game" and "talk less, smile more" is what gave us Starmer.

Puja
They don't need to win over those people, though, they need to win over Reform voters...and lapsed Tory voters who aren't sure who to vote for. The former Labour voters will take care of themselves (ourselves?).

Again, sorry to keep quoting Hungarian politics, but it's a pretty extreme and obvious example here. My wife asked the same question, about why Magyar was using the lannguage he was using and not getting involved in societal issues at all, and not talking to any of her friends or circle. And it's simple: she will vote for him. Not because she likes him but because there is no other choice.

And others will do the same.

The voters who need convincing are voters like my parents. Former centrists who have been radicalised to far right, but not as far as Reform. Who would vote Tory, but they're a joke right now. And who are unsure who the hell they could vote for.

THAT is the void that needs filling, and it doesn't get filled with social rhetoric, but with lifestyle. With promoting policies that will improve public services while being very clear that they will not harm pension pots of people with less than £x saved. And £x can be high enough.
User avatar
Puja
Site Admin
Posts: 11551
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Puja »

Stom wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:35 am
Puja wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 10:13 am
Stom wrote: Mon Oct 06, 2025 9:37 am

The thing is...he has a valid point...

It's an interesting debating topic. Would it win them a single new vote? No. Can it turn people off of them? Absolutely.

It's imbecilic. There is no potential upside. Seriously, right now I don't care what Magyar's actual political ideology is (I probably disagree with him in the main), but he's the only politician I've seen who has actually played the game to win against this rhetoric.
I would argue that the upside is that Trump is largely detested in this country and there are votes to be earned for the Greens from the voters grimacing at the sight of Starmer and Lammy licking Trump's balls, by putting forward policies that propose more independence and distance from the US.

Having said that, it's also not official Green policy (yet), but Polanski's previously publically stated opinion, which has only come up because the media are digging to try and find things to smear him with (other than, "Haha, he engaged with a Sun article during his previous career as a hypnotherapist and they made him look like an idiot!") and he's had to answer questions about it in every single interview.

Plus, I don't mind a politician having beliefs and morals, even ones I don't believe in myself (as long as not crossing any of my red lines). Just "playing the game" and "talk less, smile more" is what gave us Starmer.

Puja
They don't need to win over those people, though, they need to win over Reform voters...and lapsed Tory voters who aren't sure who to vote for. The former Labour voters will take care of themselves (ourselves?).
That's very much putting the cart before the horse. The Greens need to eat Labour first, otherwise they will be marginalised by "Greens cannot win here; anything but a vote for Starmer is a vote for Farage" advertising.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

Probably the next Tory leader:
I went to Handsworth in Birmingham the other day to do a video on litter and it was absolutely appalling. It’s as close as I’ve come to a slum in this country. But the other thing I noticed there was that it was one of the worst integrated places I’ve ever been to. In fact, in the hour and a half I was filming news there I didn’t see another white face.
That’s not the kind of country I want to live in.
I want to live in a country where people are properly integrated. It’s not about the colour of your skin or your faith, of course it isn’t. But I want people to be living alongside each other, not parallel lives. That’s not the right way we want to live as a country.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... birmingham

It's more whistle than dog whistle. Maybe he'll bring some of the racists home from Reform.
User avatar
Puja
Site Admin
Posts: 11551
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Puja »

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Tue Oct 07, 2025 11:56 am Probably the next Tory leader:
I went to Handsworth in Birmingham the other day to do a video on litter and it was absolutely appalling. It’s as close as I’ve come to a slum in this country. But the other thing I noticed there was that it was one of the worst integrated places I’ve ever been to. In fact, in the hour and a half I was filming news there I didn’t see another white face.
That’s not the kind of country I want to live in.
I want to live in a country where people are properly integrated. It’s not about the colour of your skin or your faith, of course it isn’t. But I want people to be living alongside each other, not parallel lives. That’s not the right way we want to live as a country.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... birmingham

It's more whistle than dog whistle. Maybe he'll bring some of the racists home from Reform.
He's done this kind of thing a few times and it's absolutely incredible:
Step 1: Say something negative referring to the colour of people's skin
Step 2: Say "It’s not about the colour of your skin, of course it isn’t."
Step 3: Continue on.

Rob, if it's not about the colour of the skin, why is you not seeing another white face the evidence you're raising? Why are majority black areas not "properly integrated", Rob? Why did you bring up faith? Can black faces not belong to native British, Christian people?

How integrated is the place where you live, Rob? Or is it only an issue when there's lots of brown people in one place?

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

Puja wrote: Tue Oct 07, 2025 2:45 pm
Son of Mathonwy wrote: Tue Oct 07, 2025 11:56 am Probably the next Tory leader:
I went to Handsworth in Birmingham the other day to do a video on litter and it was absolutely appalling. It’s as close as I’ve come to a slum in this country. But the other thing I noticed there was that it was one of the worst integrated places I’ve ever been to. In fact, in the hour and a half I was filming news there I didn’t see another white face.
That’s not the kind of country I want to live in.
I want to live in a country where people are properly integrated. It’s not about the colour of your skin or your faith, of course it isn’t. But I want people to be living alongside each other, not parallel lives. That’s not the right way we want to live as a country.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... birmingham

It's more whistle than dog whistle. Maybe he'll bring some of the racists home from Reform.
He's done this kind of thing a few times and it's absolutely incredible:
Step 1: Say something negative referring to the colour of people's skin
Step 2: Say "It’s not about the colour of your skin, of course it isn’t."
Step 3: Continue on.

Rob, if it's not about the colour of the skin, why is you not seeing another white face the evidence you're raising? Why are majority black areas not "properly integrated", Rob? Why did you bring up faith? Can black faces not belong to native British, Christian people?

How integrated is the place where you live, Rob? Or is it only an issue when there's lots of brown people in one place?

Puja
Clearly he gauges the level of 'integration' by the number of white faces he sees - low integration being where there are few (or, shock horror) no white faces.

Therefore he can live in an area where all the faces are white and be satisfied that it is maximally integrated, and very much the sort of country he'd like to live in.

I think we can just say Jenrick is a racist. I think we're there. Shame Badenoch doesn't think so, or didn't feel like taking him on (more likely the former, I think).
User avatar
Puja
Site Admin
Posts: 11551
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Puja »

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Tue Oct 07, 2025 8:14 pm Shame Badenoch doesn't think so, or didn't feel like taking him on (more likely the former, I think).
You can't blame her. He said, specifically, that it wasn't about the colour of anyone's skin, so therefore how can it be racist?

I mean, he's probably got loads of black friend! Couldn't possibly be racist.

Puja
Backist Monk
User avatar
Stom
Posts: 3381
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 10:57 am

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Stom »

So, the Tory party, the biggest party in British politics. With £3m in donations. Is there to serve the people of Britian.

I mean...they're just a joke by now, aren't they...
User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

Puja wrote: Tue Oct 07, 2025 8:19 pm
Son of Mathonwy wrote: Tue Oct 07, 2025 8:14 pm Shame Badenoch doesn't think so, or didn't feel like taking him on (more likely the former, I think).
You can't blame her. He said, specifically, that it wasn't about the colour of anyone's skin, so therefore how can it be racist?

I mean, he's probably got loads of black friend! Couldn't possibly be racist.

Puja
The BBC reported this, and played the audio of his words. But they left out the 'That’s not the kind of country I want to live in' line.

Nice, tame reporting from the BBC. Get Jenrick's words out there in a form that sounds more like a statement of fact than racist aspiration.
Danno
Posts: 1870
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:41 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Danno »

This is amazing.

https://archive.ph/KZZC1

The bedwetter draped in a flag with a can of Dr Pepper slew me.

And a little titbit from the fellow pictured in the upper left

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/wha ... nderstand/

Absolutely astounding piece in general, but fuck me:
"After stonewalling me at dinner last night, my mum gave the same response to the same question"

Was the answer "stop trying to shag your sister you nasty little prick"?
User avatar
Puja
Site Admin
Posts: 11551
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Puja »

Danno wrote: Thu Oct 09, 2025 1:40 pm And a little titbit from the fellow pictured in the upper left

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/wha ... nderstand/

Absolutely astounding piece in general, but fuck me:
"After stonewalling me at dinner last night, my mum gave the same response to the same question"

Was the answer "stop trying to shag your sister you nasty little prick"?
So many things to deal with in that link. That person is allegedly 26, but his picture looks 40 and his writing style and debating technique looks 17. I have never seen such an incredible and incessant abuse of the slippery slope fallacy to try and claim that "the next logical step" is compulsory eugenics. The whole thing is like a guide to logical fallacies: false equivalences of "well, if you're against it because of the increased risk of birth defects then we should crack down on over-40s reproducing because that also has an increased risk", strawmen, begging the question, loaded questions - it's an absolute masterpiece of spurious word salad.

And let's finally deal with the actual meat of the thing, which is that all those words have been ejaculated onto the paper to defend the right to incest.

Fucking hell.

Weird hill to choose to die on, but at least you'll be dead.

Puja


ETA. Fuck me:
Charles Amos studied Political Theory at The University of Oxford
What the hells has happened to Oxford if that's the level of quality of argument that their alumni produce?! Mind, I note it doesn't explicitly say that "Charles Amos got a degree in Political Theory" so it's entirely possible he got in with money/connections/tutors and left after a short period of realising he wasn't as clever as he had always thought he was.
Backist Monk
User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

Danno wrote: Thu Oct 09, 2025 1:40 pm This is amazing.

https://archive.ph/KZZC1

The bedwetter draped in a flag with a can of Dr Pepper slew me.

And a little titbit from the fellow pictured in the upper left

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/wha ... nderstand/

Absolutely astounding piece in general, but fuck me:
"After stonewalling me at dinner last night, my mum gave the same response to the same question"

Was the answer "stop trying to shag your sister you nasty little prick"?
Unfortunately there was a link on that page to a Rod Liddle article where he opines that Robert Jenrick was right to say what he said. I got this much of the article before the paywall mercifully cut me off:
I’ve just got back from doing a spot of shopping in my local town – and do you know what struck me? How white it was. Absolutely heaving with ghostfaces. In fact, in the hour or so that I spent there I don’t think I saw a single non-white person, apart from some young ladies leaving the local tanning salon who were the colour of a glass of Tango and that doesn’t really count.

It is OK to say this, incidentally, if you then use it as a basis to attack the town’s lack of diversity and demand the government ship a few ethnics in, regardless of whether or not they fancy the idea. It is not OK if you are expressing happiness in the fact that the town is all white – if, for example, I had written the words ‘Thank the living Lord Jesus Christ!’ after my second sentence. That would be bad and I’d lose my job and all hope of employment anywhere else . . .
No Rod, you dumb racist, the point was that Jenrick didn't just say he saw no white faces the whole time he was there - he followed it immediately with a statement of unhappiness about that state of affairs ie that he wouldn't want to live in a country like that. That is the point, that's why it wasn't just a statement of (alleged) fact, that's why it was racist.
User avatar
Son of Mathonwy
Posts: 5353
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Son of Mathonwy »

Puja wrote: Thu Oct 09, 2025 4:31 pm
Danno wrote: Thu Oct 09, 2025 1:40 pm And a little titbit from the fellow pictured in the upper left

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/wha ... nderstand/

Absolutely astounding piece in general, but fuck me:
"After stonewalling me at dinner last night, my mum gave the same response to the same question"

Was the answer "stop trying to shag your sister you nasty little prick"?
So many things to deal with in that link. That person is allegedly 26, but his picture looks 40 and his writing style and debating technique looks 17. I have never seen such an incredible and incessant abuse of the slippery slope fallacy to try and claim that "the next logical step" is compulsory eugenics. The whole thing is like a guide to logical fallacies: false equivalences of "well, if you're against it because of the increased risk of birth defects then we should crack down on over-40s reproducing because that also has an increased risk", strawmen, begging the question, loaded questions - it's an absolute masterpiece of spurious word salad.

And let's finally deal with the actual meat of the thing, which is that all those words have been ejaculated onto the paper to defend the right to incest.

Fucking hell.

Weird hill to choose to die on, but at least you'll be dead.

Puja


ETA. Fuck me:
Charles Amos studied Political Theory at The University of Oxford
What the hells has happened to Oxford if that's the level of quality of argument that their alumni produce?! Mind, I note it doesn't explicitly say that "Charles Amos got a degree in Political Theory" so it's entirely possible he got in with money/connections/tutors and left after a short period of realising he wasn't as clever as he had always thought he was.
I think I'd agree that there isn't a moral argument against it as such, if it's consensual, but there are very good practical arguments for it to be illegal, particularly that it puts a big barrier against dodgy parents grooming their own kids and waiting till they're 16, and all the genetic risks. And it's very very rarely a problem because we are predisposed not to fancy people we grew up very close to. But in cases where long lost siblings (who did not grow up together) meet and like each other, I have a bit of sympathy :?.

But my god, not a hill to die on.
User avatar
Puja
Site Admin
Posts: 11551
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Snap General Election called

Post by Puja »

Puja wrote: Thu Oct 09, 2025 4:31 pm
Danno wrote: Thu Oct 09, 2025 1:40 pm And a little titbit from the fellow pictured in the upper left

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/wha ... nderstand/

Absolutely astounding piece in general, but fuck me:
"After stonewalling me at dinner last night, my mum gave the same response to the same question"

Was the answer "stop trying to shag your sister you nasty little prick"?
So many things to deal with in that link. That person is allegedly 26, but his picture looks 40 and his writing style and debating technique looks 17. I have never seen such an incredible and incessant abuse of the slippery slope fallacy to try and claim that "the next logical step" is compulsory eugenics. The whole thing is like a guide to logical fallacies: false equivalences of "well, if you're against it because of the increased risk of birth defects then we should crack down on over-40s reproducing because that also has an increased risk", strawmen, begging the question, loaded questions - it's an absolute masterpiece of spurious word salad.

And let's finally deal with the actual meat of the thing, which is that all those words have been ejaculated onto the paper to defend the right to incest.

Fucking hell.

Weird hill to choose to die on, but at least you'll be dead.

Puja


ETA. Fuck me:
Charles Amos studied Political Theory at The University of Oxford
What the hells has happened to Oxford if that's the level of quality of argument that their alumni produce?! Mind, I note it doesn't explicitly say that "Charles Amos got a degree in Political Theory" so it's entirely possible he got in with money/connections/tutors and left after a short period of realising he wasn't as clever as he had always thought he was.
The rule of reading any political news on the internet should always be that, if it makes you go, "What the fuck?! That's ridiculous!", then the first thing you should do is ask why they're trying to make you angry.

Shared this with a few people and someone noted the following:
...the NHS recently published some guidance material around managing the issue of cousin marriages such as providing genetic counselling and public health campaigns as well as the need to tackle the subject sensitively to avoid further stigmatising certain communities such as Pakistani communities where it's more commonplace. It unfortunately was stumbled upon by right wing media outlets such as the Daily Mail where it has been jumped upon and they've led with the line of "the woke left are promoting inbreeding". Now I fear that people like this guy are being deliberately given a platform in order to stir this up even further. I feel like it's obvious that it's rage bait to most but I worry about where that resulting rage may be directed.
...
the headline in the image that the debate is around a Conservative MP campaigning to ban cousin marriage and they're trying to paint any opposition to this as pro inbreeding rather than people just attempting to point out that banning cousin marriage is an overly simplistic idea that could actually make the issue of forced marriage worse rather than preventing it.
I did wonder why GBeebies would interview him and Spectator host his risible rebuttal, but I thought it was about allowing a Tory councillor to humiliate himself, as I assumed anything with a Tory in it wouldn't be about anti-woke culture-war bullshit. Unfortunately, everything they do is about anti-woke culture-war bullshit, in this case simplifying a complicated issue into, "Look at the guy who wants to shag siblings."

Gods, can't we just enjoy laughing at a Tory ineptly promoting incest anymore? Why can we not have nice things?

Puja
Backist Monk
Post Reply