Liberals, Fascists and other things....

[TE44]

The cat, As we can see by this thread discussion is no longer an option. Accusation, which in itself is alright if the intent is to open the conversation but it is often with the intention to silence. It feels very much a reality that many people who believe themselves to be tolerant, advocates for free speech able to celebrate and respect differences can only do this within the confines of people who agree with them. Being with, like minded people can be a relief especially when you are a minority, it can create a feeling of safety, although as groups last we see the same problems arising with power, self importance and human traits where many of the things associated with fairness, freedoms, left thinking are not only compromised but only exist for the group individuals have associated with. This feels rife in many walks of life at this time. People who say they agree with not silencing, silencing, words and actions, behaviours no longer match. Left and right politics feel the same to me, but left is still associated with fairness and higher moral ground, followers/ voters people who have supported decisions and actions often continue to support behaviours, beliefs they have agreed with even when they are behaving in a way that is contradictive to the words they are using. We are being fed so much contradiction through our systems of communication whilst there is a silencing going on worldwide. Many friends of mine are recognising and questioning the left especially as this behaviour we would normally associate with the right seems now ingrained in left. Individuals sre moving from people blinded by there own beliefs blinded to there behaviour. Sorry if this is not clear but I struggle with finding words and time using my phone.

[JohnL]

A lot of people realised a few years back that if you make a position and then insinuate your opponent should go halfway to your position you can then move the goalposts to a position further away and negotiate to go halfway on that - you can then repeat.

I'm not sure how debaters are supposed to deal with that other than not negotiate.

[Blah Blah]

And it is precisely that shifting of goalposts that is the problem with debates like this. The truth is that the emergence of a harder left narrative goes hand in hand with the emergence of a harder right narrative. This happens again and again in political history. And equally typical, is that those sympathetic to ideas from the fringes of both sides, are equally intolerant of the other, and equally incapable of seeing their own hypocritical bias and intolerance.

This is why the most dangerous people are those who use nuance to push the boundaries, very clever people who know exactly what they are doing, and know how to manipulate the debate. This is the typical populist politician (on both left and right), who rabble rouses over encouraging consensus (trying to appear of the people as opposed to part of the elite). Appeals to ignorance over seeking the truth. Divide and rule in other words. They all have no regard for law and a free press that can hold them to account.

Today some details around Trump's taxes were released, which come as no surprise to anyone who knows the man or his business dealings. Trump bleats 'fake news' because in his world, that is all that is required to make it go away. Having never been held to account for anything, and a lifetime of getting away with everything, he is the epitome of 'above the law' privilege. He was never capable of draining any swamp, being the crocodile who belongs to it. He, like most populists, is a narcissistic fraud. So what we should be looking at really, is why people fall prey to the nonsense of characters like this.

[malumbu]

Wow this is getting a rather toxic. To be constructive I posed the question on how you bring back the county again. Blair did it before he came a war monger. Cameron could have done it. May tried, but this was an abject failure. Before all of this Thatcher did a great job at dividing us, and it feels deja vu again.

But forget my simplistic and bias analysis. What can be done? The opportunities from coronavirus already seem to have been lost. Apols for hijacking your thread Cat, but it seemed to have become a bit of a sick parrot

[Sephiroth]

Simple correction: blair didn?t lose the country because he became a warmonger. 2/3rd population backed it and even afterwards re-elected him. It?s just millions of people forget they wanted something when it became obvious it was a shitshow. Sound like anything else about to happen?

The wider debate on this thread has had me thinking but haven?t been near a keyboard big enough to compose a reply yet

I don?t understand any post that says ?discussion is being stifled tho? - the arguments are being had but no one is prevented from airing their view. But I do think the original post is fundamentally flawed, Based as it is on the premise of BoN quoting ?liberal? words from Trump as an example of his liberalism.

[Blah Blah]

And that is the point I have been trying to make Sephiroth. One could argue the flaws in that original post are accidental (ill thought out etc). I am inferring they are not, but are instead a reflection of the political stance of the poster. In other words, a deliberate exercise in nuanced bias. I find it hypocritical.

To answer your question Malumbu on what can be done, that is rather hard to answer without arguing for better education and control over the nonsense being fed into some people's minds by social media etc. It is no accident that those on the political fringes rally so hard against any kind of censorship and concern themselves so much over who controls education. These are anarchists, who want chaos, before being the winners from some new world order that suits them. What I would argue needs to happen, is that we stop giving disproportionate weight and exposure to fringe ideas, conspiracy theories and public figures who have no interest in a cohesive society that works for all. That would be a good start.

[TheCat]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> a reflection of the political stance of the

> poster. In other words, a deliberate exercise in

> nuanced bias. I find it hypocritical.

>

Im intrigued Blah Blah...please educate me as to what my political stance is? you've already claimed multiple times you know my motivations for posting better than I do...so it will be a relief to have you fill in the blanks....

[Blah Blah]

Nope, not rising to it.

When you begin a conversation, claiming to address bringing sides together, but actively seek to sanitise the mouthpieces of the the alt right, while demonising the mouthpieces of a part of the left as some kind of disproportionate threat to who knows what, over the alt right mouthpieces who are actually in government, undermining ideas around democracy and government and sowing government endorsed division, you are playing games with nuance, in exactly the same way that the alt right and their media supporters, like BoN have been doing for years. I am calling it out.

[TheCat]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Nope, not rising to it.

>

HAHA...brilliant. You couldn't make it up.

You spend a whole thread p!ssing all over my apparent political stance/motivations, and generally accusing me of attempting some devious, covert, manipulation of political debate - then when asked to defend or explain those accusations - you're 'not rising to it'???

[TE44]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And that is the point I have been trying to make

> Sephiroth. One could argue the flaws in that

> original post are accidental (ill thought out

> etc). I am inferring they are not, but are instead

> a reflection of the political stance of the

> poster. In other words, a deliberate exercise in

> nuanced bias. I find it hypocritical.

>

> To answer your question Malumbu on what can be

> done, that is rather hard to answer without

> arguing for better education and control over the

> nonsense being fed into some people's minds by

> social media etc. It is no accident that those on

> the political fringes rally so hard against any

> kind of censorship and concern themselves so much

> over who controls education. These are anarchists,

> who want chaos, before being the winners from some

> new world order that suits them. What I would

> argue needs to happen, is that we stop giving

> disproportionate weight and exposure to fringe

> ideas, conspiracy theories and public figures who

> have no interest in a cohesive society that works

> for all. That would be a good start.

blah blah I can*t understand your response to what can be done. you say it is hard to answer without argueing for better education and control over social media nonsonse being fed into peoples mind,how can you see this being achieved. who should have this power of control and can you give me an example of the nonsense you feel should be controlled. Control in education is extremely worrying especially when it is offered as teaching inclusion whilst excluding. This for me is what has and is creating the chaos. who do you believe to be the anarchists.you resort to cancelling people out because they do not have your views. So you think to achieve a cohesive society that works for all we should stop giving disproprtionate weigh tand exposure. to certain people. How would this work for a start to your inclusive new society.

[Blah Blah]

An easy example for you. Q Anon. A complete fantasy from start to finish that led to a gun toting man driving across states to a Pizza cafe looking for a pedophile ring he believed was there. You have a point about who makes the decisions around censorship, but let's not pretend that you do not know what I am talking about here. The present free for all is precisely what enables politicians to deliberately lie and cry 'fake news' when called out on it. You only have to look at Trump's doubling down of his now exposed tax affairs to see the mess we are in.

[TE44]

blah blah I am responding before I google Q anon, which I have heard mention before but honestly have no idea of what it means nor the story you attatch to it. I can say it is worrying time if people start taking it into there own hands in dealing with pedophiles in this manner. Apart from the obvious scenario of innocent people getting hurt. What do you mean a free for all, there is no denial people are being silenced. I believe people who are in positions of power e press and politicians eg regardless of whether left or right have no excuse for abusing there powers. manipulating truths, creating chaos by confusion, taking away human rights and putting many in a position where they are thrown into living a life that no longer makes sense. I am more concerned by people who believe there truths can overshadow anyone elses beliefs. who refuses to see the importance of other peoples views even though they may disagree with them on other matters. This may be a place to start to make a difference in the intolerances we are now seeing.

[TheCat]

Some reflections on this thread:

So throughout this thread Blah Blah has labelled me some sort of stalking horse for the alt-right, deviously using my sophisticated debating tricks to lull the EDF into a false sense of security. And before you know it?BAM!....you?re all stark raving, immigrant hating nutjobs.

I, of course, have attempted to bring the conversation back to the realms of reality and have denied these accusations, claiming that I?m genuinely just a liberal centrist myself, increasingly concerned by the growing intolerance I see from my overwhelmingly left-leaning circle of friends and acquaintances. None of this is meant to suggest that intolerance on the right is not also a problem, of course it is, but for the most part, I view right wing intolerance as easily identifiable and certainly not mainstream. Whereas, I believe left-wing intolerance in quite mainstream in our corporations and institutions (albeit perhaps not in our government). Therefore, its something I think is reasonable to discuss it, as I am concerned about the direction that sections of the left are heading.

But of course, Blah Blah is live to my tricks, and knows that the more that I deny my underhanded intentions, the more I just confirm my guilt!

Anyway?I?ll let anyone reading this decide which version of TheCat sounds more plausible.

But?fortuitously enough, Blah Blah?s characterisation of me has given us a fantastic example of the exact things Im concerned with, regarding intolerance on the left. Let?s use an evidence based approach?.

? I have asked questions about left-wing intolerance ? and according to Blah Blah that simply must make me someone attempting to sanitise alt-right views. Therefore, the things I want to discuss are from ? the fringes?, and should be dismissed out of hand

? He/she also has referenced a number of times my seemingly evil use off ?nuance? ? like that is a bad thing? Because it seems that in the world of the intolerant progressive there is only black and white. Only with me or against me. ?Nuance? is the work of the alt-right apparently and should be warning sign to dismiss someone?s views.

? There has been the attempts to again rubbish my questions, as they are ?unbalanced? - because I am not also questioning all the right wing generated problems in the world (because every thread on the EDF should address every possible issue for the sake of balance). But when specifically challenged on why similar claims for balance were note made on two threads I?ve started which were critical of the current right-wing government we have ? there was typically no response. Blah Blah is seemingly too clever to ?rise to it? and seek to explain or defend his/her own statements.

? Finally, there is of course the obvious point, that he/she has focussed on smearing my motivations/the source of the questions, rather than actually attempting to address the questions themselves. It appears the approach is that if the source is sufficiently discredited, then the questions don't need to be answered. We see this one used constantly by both side of any debate of course - but this thread is a good example.

Perhaps Blah Blah has been burned before by interacting with various alt-right/racist nutjob loons, and views any questions as a gateway to extreme views ? so aggressively objects to any questions or discussion on that basis.

I come from a genuine position of wanting to discuss this issue. I believe that by refusing the acknowledge the problems the left has in this regard, the left is basically driving away well-intentioned centrists who would naturally be socially progressive, but grow tired of the rigidness of some of the left?s mantras. This then opens the door for our government to feel emboldened to stick Charles Moore and Paul Dacre into key positions at the BBC and Ofcom, respectively (which I find somewhat concerning). Yes?if we look at those potential appointments in isolation, they seem like a ?right-wing created problem?; but I genuinely believe that the only reason why the government can make such moves without large backlash, is because the left are indeed driving people away, and we are seeing a backlash to ?woke-washing? which has occurred across many parts of society.

I personally think that?s worthy of discussion. I have started a number of threads on similar ?culture war? issues in recent months, as I believe the EDF would be the perfect place to have those discussions, given that it is largely populated by liberal centrists/left of centre posters who might feel some inclination for self-reflection (there?s no point talking about intolerant progressives on a right-wing chat group?.we know exactly what is going to be said!). It seems though that clearly not all progressives are interested in any form of self-reflection?.or even respectful discussion apparently!

As an aside, its really not my style or desire to single someone out the way I have above. But since the poster in questions has repeatedly made accusations on my character and political stance (all of which are untrue), a little bit of retort, I felt, was justified.

[TE44]

TheCat. I've had similiar problems over the years on this forum, with people making wrong assumptions about me, probably because we are limited by not seeing people. I say that from a personal level as it is easier for me to talk in person. I am not clear with words. I am genuinely puzzled by Blah blahs reaction to your posts, I find your them clear and cannot see how he has reached his assumptions.

I have many friends who have been active in gay/womans rights over many years. Who up to now would see themselves as left thinking. They feel they have not only been silenced but banned from participating from meetings being told they are hateful, for wanting discussion. The last few years we have seen police turning up at peoples doors, who are as confused as the accused on why they are there. Checking on peoples thinking, we have seen this not only with gender issues. We have seen it in decisions to allow certain people to have a voice whilst not allowing others who wish to be heard they are ridiculed conspiracy theorist, nutjobs, lunatics. Discussion often brings choice and I feel the more our choices are under threat the more discussions are being shutdown and vice versa.

[seenbeen]

I think we all found out who the nutjobs and lunatics are after the milkshake was thrown at Nigel Farage and Jo Brand said it should have been acid. And when Boris got coronavirus and another second rate comedienne Miriam Margolyes said she wished he would die.....

Still, it's nice to know what these fools really think!

[Sephiroth]

The Margoyles thing isn't quite as clear cut as that is it?

"When Miriam Margolyes was ?cleared by Ofcom? last week over remarks she made on Channel 4?s The Last Leg in early May, I was broadly pleased. But there was a lot about the situation that vexed me.

Here?s what actually happened. On a live late-night comedy show, speaking from her kitchen because of the lockdown, Margolyes described the government?s handling of the coronavirus crisis as ?a disgrace? and ?a public scandal? and then went on: ?I had difficulty not wanting Boris Johnson to die, I wanted him to die, and then I thought that reflects badly on me and I don?t want to be the sort of person who wants people to die. So, then I wanted him to get better, which he did do, he did get better, but he didn?t get better as a human being and I really would prefer that.?"

A lot of what is described as intolerant left is actually made up nonsense by the right (see also Last Night of the Proms")

Which isn't to say there isn't a side to the left that doesn't fit the descripion "intolerant"

[JohnL]

I think this is a case of someone saying what they actually thought without the usual self censorship - everybody has dark thoughts sometimes - if you didn't you would probably have some sort of issue.

I saw some older lady (can't remember whom) on Sky News recently saying she expected all her family wanted her out of the way - Kay et al on Sky News laughed in a rather embarrassed way.

[TE44]

People I know who see themselves as left thinking have for a few years felt issues around tolerance, free speech, recognising different views and being open to listen and respect others whilst understanding some opposing opinions may create a distance. Not a distance that can't be closed over other issues.What I have noticed over the years is a growing need to be right. This seems to be part of this culture that sees others with different viewpoints as dangerous, nutters etc. When people take this to an extreme especially in groups it blurs the definition of what they stand for and both begin to behave in a similiar way. My children tried to persuade me to vote Labour at the last election, I gave it some thought, attended the hustings but couldnt bring myself to vote to get Tories out, although U wanted them out. I voted the greens, although told why I shouldn't I decided for myself although it felt it was the best out a bad bunch. My son has said to me through these Covid times, he thinks it may have been worse if labour had got in. As labour may have went that extra mile with keeping Us Safe whilst ignoring the cruellest measures of the most vulnerable, and the removal of our rights which I believe may have been even more forceful if they had won proving they put people before money.

[Blah Blah]

But I have to keep coming back to my core point, that there in intolerance, extremism, cranks, rabble rousers, and those who speak without thinking on ALL sides of the political spectrum. This idea that the left are somehow more predisposed than the right is just nonsense. Yet no-one apart from John and Sephiroth here, seems capable of acknowledging that.

And there are also absolute truths and downright lies, that some people refuse to see on the one hand, and excuse on the other. I really don't give a fig what anyone thinks about anything, but I do draw the line at willful ignorance, denial of the truth and deliberate obfuscation and misinformation. Those things are dangerous. And as a society, we have a duty to protect the public from that. Sadly, given that many of the world's politicians are the source of much of that (endorsed by large parts of the media), it is easier said than done. What ever the answer to that is, is not the conspiracy theories and rabbit holes of the political fringes.

Ask yourselves this. Is a dishonest, chaotic, lazy, former columnist really the best the UK can do for a PM? Is an overt, tax dodging narcissist really the best the USA can do for a President? These are the questions we should be asking. Just how our political institutions have descended into the hands of morally corrupt individuals with no regard for anything but their own pockets. It could of course be argued it was always thus anyway. Everything else, is just divide and rule. We never learn do we.

[malumbu]

seenbeen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think we all found out who the nutjobs and

> lunatics are after the milkshake was thrown at

> Nigel Farage and Jo Brand said it should have been

> acid. And when Boris got coronavirus and another

> second rate comedienne Miriam Margolyes said she

> wished he would die.....

> Still, it's nice to know what these fools really

> think!

You wont like this then (pre-Thatcher's death). I'm not going to apologise. It's not wishing her dead, just celebrating it.

[JohnL]

Tommy's back (from Spain) and yelping as he gets arrested just for being him (I guess it's as he arranged a meeting bigger than 6)

https://twitter.com/mi6rogue/status/1322924697781260291

I could have picked many links to this comedy.

[JohnL]

Meanwhile Nigel Farage has renamed the Brexit Party as an anti-lockdown party.

[Blah Blah]

On Tommy, as irritating as he is, there is something to be said about abuse of Police powers at the moment. His arrest was planned, on bogus charges, and he has been released without charge or bail.

It seems as though Police are using the blanket excuse 'coronavirus regulations' for dispersal, instead of using the correct process of obtaining dispersal orders. And we should all be worried about that. Most of these arrests, if they ever get to court, will be thrown out. The coronavirus act does not empower Police to disperse at a whim. There have to be certain factors in play. And social distancing, or lack of, seems to be the most common citation from Police. However, they have been very selective about which gatherings/ protests they break up and which they leave alone.

And that of course, gives Farage the perfect angle back into politics, back to being a pain in the Tories backside, back to being the center of attention and champion for the people who feel ignored, disenfranchised, and back to rabble rousing the racists and bigots.

[diable rouge]

One hopes that these lockdowns aren't a long-term thing, that eventually a vaccine, if not providing total immunity, then at least boosting our immune system to make it harder to catch, coupled with better treatments for those that do. So, if that's the case, what's in it for Farage? I can't help think the whole thing just stinks of political opportunism, a vanity project for someone who since Brexit has become politically obsolete. The danger is the media will pander to him again like they did over Brexit, give him the oxygen of publicity he craves. Instead they need to ask him to back up his arguments for not having a lockdown, ask to see the economic and science-based evidence. And what other policies will this new party have, or is it just a single-issue protest group designed to spook the Tories?

Also, the demographic that he had the most support from over Brexit i.e. the over 65s are the most at risk from Covid, and they are the most in favour of a lockdown according to a recent poll (I think it was YouGov). Conversely, the demographic most anti-lockdown i.e. the 18-24s are strongly opposed to Brexit, and Farage himself is deeply unpopular with them. So it's not a straightforward transfer of allegiance from Brexit to anti-lockdown, and something's got to give if he's to get to the level of support he had over Brexit.

There's also the sweet irony in that he helped remove the one platform that gave him some political legitimacy, i.e. the European Parliament. It will be much harder for him to get a foothold in the UK's first past the post system, but I suspect he knows all this. Once a narcissistic twat...

[malumbu]

I watched most of the documentary on the Beeb about Trump and Covid. Not sure how objective it was but it of course played to my beliefs. The most shocking visuals were the conspiracy theory brigade (hopefully a small minority) who voiced their disagreement by coughing at people, for example when told by store security to put on a mask. Farage and Y-L haven't followed suit.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000p36r