|
Post by DarknessFish on Nov 5, 2019 20:50:54 GMT
That's the one thing that shits me about political discourse these days (on both sides), the immediate response to something happening is "but but but the other side did this at well", and nothing ever gets fucking discussed properly. If the Conservatives are doctoring videos to deceive the voting public, talk about that first, then get onto the Labour says that Tories are killing people stuff. It's an equivalence. I don't doubt that the Tories manipulated the video. But the suggestion is that one side is morally more pure than the other. The fact is that both sides are just as bad as each other. Not actually equivalent cases though, are they? Labour reference research which attempts to point out that austerity could have caused an extra 120,000 deaths. The research is published with the methodology open to criticism, independent of the labour party. There is at least a debate to be had. This is the conservatives actively and deliberately attempting to mislead.
|
|
|
Post by tory on Nov 5, 2019 21:05:54 GMT
No-one doubts that cutbacks on social care and spending are probably going to affect care in some respects. There are many in government who believe that the cuts were overzealous in some areas. But to say that people were murdered is just downright appalling and the sort of language that helps absolutely no-one.
From Full Fact
|
|
|
Post by DarknessFish on Nov 5, 2019 21:30:58 GMT
Nope, the language doesn't help. But absolutely not equivalent.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Nov 5, 2019 22:30:21 GMT
It's an equivalence. I don't doubt that the Tories manipulated the video. But the suggestion is that one side is morally more pure than the other. The fact is that both sides are just as bad as each other. Not actually equivalent cases though, are they? Labour reference research which attempts to point out that austerity could have caused an extra 120,000 deaths. The research is published with the methodology open to criticism, independent of the labour party. There is at least a debate to be had. This is the conservatives actively and deliberately attempting to mislead. Actually we can disagree with this
Corbyn is not saying what you post there. He is misleading the public and using hyperventilating rhetoric to do so. It's fake news. It's the "basic truth" thing. Labour don't know what they are doing so it doesn't matter that we've doctored the footage because the underlying truth - Labour are clueless on Brexit - is "true". Well, actually, it fucking does matter of course. Austerity is terrible and has led to deaths, probably "thousands" so it doesn't matter that it might not be anywhere near 120,000 because the basic truth - austerity is disgusting - is correct. It all matters and they all can fuck off.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Nov 6, 2019 7:42:40 GMT
linkWhat genius at Tory HQ thought it would be a good idea to send that cunt out to talk about Grenfell? Massie gets it: link
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Nov 6, 2019 7:49:02 GMT
No-one doubts that cutbacks on social care and spending are probably going to affect care in some respects. There are many in government who believe that the cuts were overzealous in some areas. But to say that people were murdered is just downright appalling and the sort of language that helps absolutely no-one. It’s the language of a cheap, tribal populist. It must be true cos Ash fucking Sarkar said so on Question time. Corbyn then unthinkingly retweets. Genius.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Nov 6, 2019 10:29:10 GMT
That's the one thing that shits me about political discourse these days (on both sides), the immediate response to something happening is "but but but the other side did this at well", and nothing ever gets fucking discussed properly. If the Conservatives are doctoring videos to deceive the voting public, talk about that first, then get onto the Labour says that Tories are killing people stuff.
A fair point. I would suggest that Toby’s reaction is partly borne out of the hypocrisy of Labour supporters and a desire to redress the balance by going, “ hang on a minute here…” but, yeah. Tories spinning digital fake news. Yes. They seem ahead of the Labour curve on this one but Corbyn does the same thing in the example Toby gives, he just does it in a different way. Is it equivalent? Well, I guess one is a party deliberately editing footage (weren’t they doing the same with BBC news reports ffs?) to illustrate confusion over Labours Brexit stance and the other is the leader of the party sharing mince to attack the Tories. Part of the problem is that there is so much bollocks from both sides that it’s hard to just settle on one issue because there is so much other stuff too! We are drowning in it. But in this example, they both come under “fake news” imo. One can condemn one whilst pointing out that the other does it too, just in a more old fashioned way. I would argue that Corbyn’s attitude towards the media is far more problematic than Johnson’s btw (Corbyn is quite happy to go down the Trump route on this one) but neither exist in isolation. They are part of the same problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2019 10:41:49 GMT
I would argue that Corbyn’s attitude towards the media is far more problematic than Johnson’s btw (Corbyn is quite happy to go down the Trump route on this one) but neither exist in isolation.
Corbyn is a fundamentally more honest politician than Johnson so I don't see how his attitude is "more problematic". You just have more personal dislike of him is all. We both know that Johnson will say anything that people want to hear, whether he believes it or not doesn't even come into it for him.
|
|
|
Post by Crunchy Col on Nov 6, 2019 11:00:24 GMT
That's it. Dougie's seething hatred for the Labour party, Lefties and Corbyn comes through in every post he's made here.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Nov 6, 2019 11:13:21 GMT
That's it. Dougie's seething hatred for the Labour party, Lefties and Corbyn comes through in every post he's made here.
If that's the best you can do John I'd back off now.
|
|
|
Post by Crunchy Col on Nov 6, 2019 11:15:14 GMT
The best *I* can do? What do you mean?
Do you deny what I've said?
Let's talk, brother!
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Nov 6, 2019 11:38:41 GMT
I would argue that Corbyn’s attitude towards the media is far more problematic than Johnson’s btw (Corbyn is quite happy to go down the Trump route on this one) but neither exist in isolation.
Corbyn is a fundamentally more honest politician than Johnson so I don't see how his attitude is "more problematic". You just have moe personal dislike of him is all. We both now that Johnson will say anything that people want to hear, whether he believes it or not doesn't even come into it for him.
Johnson is a serial liar. A bullshit artist. Corbyn isn’t as bad, no, I agree with you but he is a liar too and should be called out when he does. Look what happened with the wreath laying story for example. He lied about that and when the press called him out he complained about the press coverage (since dropped). Corbyn doesn’t like it when the press ask him difficult questions or point out his flaws. You can see this in interviews. The petulance, the truculent rolling of the eyes. He views journalists as he does the western world in general, through paranoid, conspiratorial eyes. The press who pointed out that he actually was present and involved in laying a wreath at the graves of Islamist terrorists are part of this conspiracy you see hence the complaint (since dropped).
LOL.
He is naturally hostile towards journalists who criticise and point out this stuff. The Panorama doc is a stitch up! The BBC is biased for saying Israel has a right to exist! He shares this proclivity with Trump funnily enough. The paranoid whining about the biased mainstream media and how he uses this for his own populist goals. He is quite happy to propagate this and exploit it for his own gain.
medium.com/behind-local-news-uk/why-society-should-fear-the-constant-political-attacks-on-journalists-and-journalism-df8aa15ea03e
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2019 11:53:48 GMT
Corbyn is a fundamentally more honest politician than Johnson so I don't see how his attitude is "more problematic". You just have moe personal dislike of him is all. We both now that Johnson will say anything that people want to hear, whether he believes it or not doesn't even come into it for him.
Johnson is a serial liar. A bullshit artist. Corbyn isn’t as bad, no, I agree with you but he is a liar too and should be called out when he does. Look what happened with the wreath laying story for example. He lied about that and when the press called him out he complained about the press coverage (since dropped). Corbyn doesn’t like it when the press ask him difficult questions or point out his flaws. You can see this in interviews. The petulance, the truculent rolling of the eyes. He views journalists as he does the western world in general, through paranoid, conspiratorial eyes. The press who pointed out that he actually was present and involved in laying a wreath at the graves of Islamist terrorists are part of this conspiracy you see hence the complaint (since dropped).
LOL.
He is naturally hostile towards journalists who criticise and point out this stuff. The Panorama doc is a stitch up! The BBC is biased for saying Israel has a right to exist! He shares this proclivity with Trump funnily enough. The paranoid whining about the biased mainstream media and how he uses this for his own populist goals. He is quite happy to propagate this and exploit it for his own gain.
medium.com/behind-local-news-uk/why-society-should-fear-the-constant-political-attacks-on-journalists-and-journalism-df8aa15ea03e
I haven't got time right now to now to follow up your specific links, though as you've taken the trouble to find them, I will address them at some point (probably tonight). What I will say is it must be very difficult for him. I imagine that being under that much scrutiny from a media that is openly antagonistic and will go out of their way to misrepresent or embroider in a negative way everything you do, you would naturally get defensive or uncooperative with them. That's not a blanket apology for him, however I do think it's an important factor to consider.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Nov 6, 2019 12:56:16 GMT
The best *I* can do? What do you mean? Do you deny what I've said? Let's talk, brother!
Why John?
I don’t feel that you reply to what I write. I ask you questions, you often don’t even answer. I write posts and I get some one line reply that barely attempts to answer or engage with what I post. Instead you use words like “seething” or “obsessed” to infer that I’m being irrational and emotional. We all have biases but I do, at least attempt to provide some kind of evidence and reasoning I think. The demonization of Jeremy Corbyn thread, for example, is me attempting to do that at tedious length. You know I think Corbyn is a cunt but you know what really angers me? It's not Corbyn, he’s just a crumply cypher, it’s all the bullshit that his supporters project onto him and the levels of hypocrisy they indulge in. You know this. His words and his actions are enough to damn him. Well, they should be hence my question as to whether he is fit to be PM.
I’m not sure how my hatred of the left is undermining my posts on this thread btw either. My seething hatred of the Labour party? Are we talking about its current incarnation or just in general? Give that I have voted for them more than any other party (I have only voted for two in my lifetime, them and the Lib Dems) I don’t think it’s comparable to, say, the hatred of the Tories you see round here, certainly not yours btw. Speaking honestly, discussions like this are sometimes difficult for a number of reasons but one thing has become very apparent to me over the last few years. We are not consuming the same media. This was very obvious on the Demonization of Corbyn thread where some posters were posting from a position of such ignorance it was exceptionally galling (the likes of Prof for example seem to read the Guardian and Another Angry Voice and that’s about it). Another thing was obvious: posters were simply regurgitating left wing blogs like Skawkbox as rebuttals. Copehead in particular was very obviously doing this. Some people might really benefit from reading a wider range of political sources and points of view. I think that’s really part of the problem here (also partisan loyalties and, of course, identity).
|
|
|
Post by Crunchy Col on Nov 6, 2019 16:33:38 GMT
aye
|
|