Oh Dear - he's gone and trumped them all!

[RobinBHM]

When the big referendum thread on this forum was running I found it very useful and learnt a great deal from it.

One thing that is great about this forum is that the members are from all parts of the country and even world, many different backgrounds and so not surprisingly lots of differing views. I think it was a great source to learn a range of different views and also different people gave links to sources I would not normally have looked at. Its always good to challenge your own views, it is all too easy to be complacent and just accept the sources of information you tend to naturally gravitate towards.

What I totally disagree with in discussions about politics and appeared in that referendum thread on here quite often is the attitude that anybody with an opposing view must be stupid. Yes some people may be biased, some people may be uninformed or mis-frame issues but debating is the only way to broaden and challenge our views.

 

[RossJarvis]

Two well reasoned posts from ROB and Robin.

Now where you're both wrong is................

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

 

[Jacob]

.....
But Jacob, the mods here or indeed other administrators of different groups don't shut down public debate because they're afraid of it, they shut it down because people with no self control or sense of decorum behave unreasonably which spoils the space for the majority. it's no more complicated or conspiratorial than that.

Yes yes I know!
It's the right wing media more than anything has made people angry. You've only got to catch a glimpse of a DM headline and whatever your point of view it will be annoying - somebody will get "the blame" - alt.right will blame loony left and vice versa.
This feeds through - so that even a friendly gathering with neighbours will involve discouragement of discussion - in case people get annoyed.
So in discouraging discussion, even for the best of reasons, they've got you playing their game.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

.....
But Jacob, the mods here or indeed other administrators of different groups don't shut down public debate because they're afraid of it, they shut it down because people with no self control or sense of decorum behave unreasonably which spoils the space for the majority. it's no more complicated or conspiratorial than that.

Yes yes I know!
It's the right wing media more than anything has made people angry. You've only got to catch a glimpse of a DM headline and whatever your point of view it will be annoying - somebody will get "the blame" - alt.right will blame loony left and vice versa.
This feeds through - so that even a friendly gathering with neighbours will involve discouragement of discussion - in case people get annoyed.
So in discouraging discussion, even for the best of reasons, they've got you playing their game.

I think you make a good point about the red tops for sure and the DM in particular. It really does have a single agenda which is clearly to flog newspapers at any cost to the truth and decent journalism. Frankly, some of their headlines should be brought in front of the law for racism because it's got that far out of control.

But, specifically with reference to here, the only time I wade in is if offending comments are directed at the person. I have a very simple rule, a response must criticise the point, not the person. The spiral downwards in these threads is always after one of your angry types, throws an insult at the person, instead of taking their point and making an argument on it's merits. That's precisely why I keep lecturing about maturity, because it's only those who have enough of it that seem able to rise above the overwhelming temptation to succumb to mud slinging.

So, I accept the press make people angry...and it's not just the right wing media, but people need to understand they're not slavish robots to the will of media magnates or third rate reporters and indeed have a personal responsibility to behave reasonably. In this place, if they choose not to exercise that responsibility and go ahead and publicly insult people then equally they have to accept the consequences.

In terms of neighbours and open discussion, I have to say that amongst my peers we have very robust open discussion (usually down the pub) and it's never yet caused bad feeling.

Lastly, I don't really think it's the job of this forum to "repair" any perceived rise in "hate" throughout modern Britain. Possibly a bit beyond our scope

 

[Inoffthered]

It's the right wing media more than anything has made people angry. You've only got to catch a glimpse of a DM headline and whatever your point of view it will be annoying - somebody will get "the blame" - alt.right will blame loony left and vice versa.
This feeds through - so that even a friendly gathering with neighbours will involve discouragement of discussion - in case people get annoyed.
So in discouraging discussion, even for the best of reasons, they've got you playing their game.

Interesting, but I'd argue that it is the broadsheets and BBC/C4 that are fuelling public anger.
During the referendum the media never missed an opportunity to label anyone with a contrary view as being a swivelled eyed loon. Post referendum, the BBC will not accept the result and has sunk to little more than a propagandist for Remain. There are numerous interviews on Youtube where the Beeboid interviewer has no interest in developing a debate but is trying to elicit a careless comment to be used for propaganda purposes. The rare exception to this is Andrew Neil who exposed the deceptions included in the recent Open Britain video which grossly misrepresented quotes from various leavers.

That a Guardian / Telegraph journalist feels able to tweet that it was time for a presidential assassination following Trumps victory demonstrates a nasty persona that , had such a comment been made by anyone from UKIP the BBC would have gone into meltdown.

The growth of alternative news sources creates a major problem for the MSM because they can no longer control what people read/watch, and the response is not to put their own in order and do their job and report the news the campaign to denigrate those with contrary views continues e.g. the BBC reporter in the USA that broadcast that UKIP was the UK equivalent of the KKK, the labelling anyone associated with alt right as being a Nazi.

It is the socialist left (who bizarrely appear to be siding with Soros and those with global ambitions for big business ) that are creating discord by wilfully seeking to undermine the democratic decisions both here and in the USA. It is a dangerous game to play and sets a precedent that the socialists may come to regret.

 

[Jacob]

[.....
It is the socialist left (who bizarrely appear to be siding with Soros and those with global ambitions for big business ) that are creating discord by wilfully seeking to undermine the democratic decisions both here and in the USA. It is a dangerous game to play and sets a precedent that the socialists may come to regret.

Quite a lot of the socialist left have been for brexit. Corbyn and McDonnel have both said that they wouldn't obstruct the implementation of art50. There's a lot of disagreement and differences of opinion on the left.
But opposing Brexit isn't "wilfully seeking to undermine the democratic decisions" it's just the normal process of democracy - just because one side had won a vote doesn't mean you can't carry on arguing against it if you wish. In any case it's only an advisory referendum and the details have to sorted out and voted upon.
It was never a simple issue and Cameron's promise to implement art 50 "immediately" was simply impossible and he had to resign.
The government didn't have to accept Cameron's poison chalice and have not implemented art50 - the game has already changed and it seems probable that a repeat referendum would be against brexit.
In the end parliament has to decide whether or not brexit can sensibly be achieved - this is the democratic process- parliament is sovereign, not Farage or anybody else.
Whatever the outcome we are all free to continue to argue for/against, for evermore!

 

[Bm101]

Brave New World (or is it 1984?) we are being told to shut up by some mysterious powers that be - but let us have press freedom to publish any old malevolent nonsense, loudly and often.

Orwell predicted a lack of information to the individual. Control by taking away choice.
Huxley foresaw the complete opposite. Lack of choice through sensory overload if you like. Too much choice.

In someone else's words,
Orwell feared the truth would be would be concealed from us.
Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance.

Who'd have thought they'd both be right?
Just off to check Donald Trump's twitter account to make sure I'm not wrong about this one.

 

[Jacob]

Interesting. I googled:
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/794200 ... books-what

 

[Bm101]

I wasn't disagreeing with you Jacob. As I said, it was in someone else's words. I wasn't trying to pass myself off as some great literary critic. Just thought it was interesting they had such different viewpoints but they might both be right when you reflect on today's society. More's the pity perhaps.
Regards
Chris

 

[Jacob]

I wasn't disagreeing with you Jacob. As I said, it was in someone else's words. I wasn't trying to pass myself off as some great literary critic. Just thought it was interesting they had such different viewpoints but they might both be right when you reflect on today's society. More's the pity perhaps.
Regards
Chris

Sorry I wasn't challenging anything you wrote I was just following it up because I thought it was interesting. No implied criticism!
Anyway those quotes say much the same as you were saying - I was just trying to go back to a source.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Funny we were talking about the role that the papers have in whipping up hate and anger yesterday....on the way to Lidl just now to pick up those remote sockets (brilliant by the way), happened to flick onto an LBC phone in where Mr James OB was debating exactly that. He was slamming into the DM for publishing the story about the murder of that Labour MP on page 30 instead of it being front page news.

 

[Jacob]

Funny we were talking about the role that the papers have in whipping up hate and anger yesterday....on the way to Lidl just now to pick up those remote sockets (brilliant by the way), happened to flick onto an LBC phone in where Mr James OB was debating exactly that. He was slamming into the DM for publishing the story about the murder of that Labour MP on page 30 instead of it being front page news.

Yes it should have been front page. Thomas Mair and many DM readers would no doubt agree with this below, which is regularly repeated in various forms:

.......wilfully seeking to undermine the democratic decisions both here and in the USA. It is a dangerous game to play and sets a precedent that the socialists may come to regret.

 

[RossJarvis]

Funny we were talking about the role that the papers have in whipping up hate and anger yesterday....on the way to Lidl just now to pick up those remote sockets (brilliant by the way), happened to flick onto an LBC phone in where Mr James OB was debating exactly that. He was slamming into the DM for publishing the story about the murder of that Labour MP on page 30 instead of it being front page news.

Another thing I found interesting was on Radio 4 last night. The chappie was saying that when he was having marital strife including infidelity, the Sun phoned up to say they were about to publish the story, when he pointed out two young children were involved and hadn't been told everything yet they decided not to publish. The DM phoned up to say the same, when told the same thing about the kids they asked "how old are the kids?", they wanted this to include in the story they did print the next day :x

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

I'll tell you a personal anecdote that informed my opinion of what the press are "really" like when I was very young. I had been back packing round the Middle East and spent a few months in Eilat, Southern tip of Israel. It just so happened there were two job opportunities for my much beleaguered travel funds: 1) In the bakery starting each weekday at 4am and 2) On the set of the filming of Rambo 3 which the plot (if you could call it that) was set in Afghanistan. Happily, the desert just outside Eilat was very like Afghanistan and better still, the Israeli's were very happy for Hollywood to build sets there and then blow them to smithereens! As long as a few Shekels changed hands.

You can guess which one I chose!

So I spent many a happy day as an extra filming with my bud Sly.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, I took copious photos during that time (you weren't meant to) and then being an enterprising little git, sold them to Fleet Street as it was back then. I will never forget the hard bitten, *** hanging from the corner of the mouth hack that interviewed me for that story. He spent half an hour either mis quoting, putting words in my mouth and generally writing the piece he wanted while incredibly loosely and occasionally referring to my actual relating of the facts.

The story got published as a double page centre spread in the News of the Screws and it was basically antirely a work of fiction. Almost nothing of what I'd told him even made it in apart from the location! It blew my mind as to how much pure fabrication had gone into it and then realised right there, the penny dropped in a big way for me....it was a business and that's all....papers like that were in the business of shifting copy and selling advertising. Everything else was back of that clear agenda.

Over the years, I've had a few occasions in business when that assertion has been corroborated. Even the boring IT press write absolute tosh about whats happening on Government projects overspending. The notion of sensationalism in the modern press is all too present. But what shocked me about the Rambo experience wasn't that it was a bit of embellishment here and there, it was pure and utter fabrication, including innuendo that he was sleeping with under age girls in his trailer on set and all manner of other salacious, complete and utter rubbish.

It opened my eyes to the kind of people that work in the media and I had spent 3 years before travelling, in TV myself. But TV are pussycats compared to the papers.

So when a bunch of young bright eyed innocents read this trash, it is bordering on the kind of indoctrination that terrorists perpetrate though clearly not as extreme. I honestly believe our press needs to be more accountable for what they print and industry bodies need more teeth to bring them to book.

 

[RossJarvis]

So when a bunch of young bright eyed innocents read this trash, it is bordering on the kind of indoctrination that terrorists perpetrate though clearly not as extreme. I honestly believe our press needs to be more accountable for what they print and industry bodies need more teeth to bring them to book.

Unfortunately it's not just the media. I "retired" (okay, finally got sacked), from the state education industry a few years back, having been fairly gob-smacked by the level of dishonesty, fraud and general incompetence of the last institution. I discovered that if you try and "whistle-blow", I.e. tell the truth about what's going on, you will have a fairly concerted effort instigated to stall, avoid or discredit you and finally have "evidence" manufactured and independent reports "rewritten" to gain the desired outcome. Interestingly enough it seems that many awarding bodies are playing along in the same game (don't bother telling them people are cheating).

The same is happening in the NHS and elsewhere. The major driver is not that people are selling anything and profiting from it, or that they are inherently wicked or dishonest, but they are terrified just trying to keep their jobs.

I'm not sure if it was mentioned in this thread earlier, but we are living in a "Post Truth Era";

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-truth_politics

It's not just politics and it's not just the "left" or the "right" who are guilty, it's endemic in the whole "system".

Which I suppose get's us back to The Donald. This maybe why he got in, because the "silent" majority are fed up of all the lies and nonsense coming from the usual suspects from either end of the field.

 

[MIGNAL]

But he's telling more lies than anyone (actually he's famous for it). It hasn't taken him long to roll back on some of his promises and he isn't even in the Whitehouse yet! So already the Clintons aren't going to jail, the wall was just a metaphor and he's reconsidering his position on the Paris treaty. Amazing turn around. We pretty much know that 45% tariffs won't be allowed by the Republicans. What's left? His infrastructure spending, NATO. Even his position on both of those may be history within 6 months. I suspect the rusty belt of America have well and truly been conned.

 

[RossJarvis]

I suspect the rusty belt of America have well and truly been conned.

I suppose, when all the usual options have been exhausted, the snake oil seller gets good sales. I think America has a history of such types

 

[Cheshirechappie]

One of the bigger problems in Western politics (US, UK and EU) is the almost unreported, but endemic corruption of the democratic process by lobbying. If your corporation or NGO has the dosh, it can effectively buy influence. I think Cameron once said he thought it would be the next big scandal; seems the lobbyists are clever enough to stay just below the radar. It happens quite openly and extensively, but so far nobody has moved to curtail it.

Now and again, a hint comes to light. Remember the sting against Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind boasting to journalists posing as lobbyists how much access they had to the decision-makers? It's become a recognised way for ex-politicians to cash in - where do you think Blair's alleged £47m property portfolio came from? Remember 'taxi for hire' Stephen Byers?

I noticed that Trump has said he won't ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, and in future will only make bi-lateral trade deals. That may be his way of signalling to the big corporations that were skewing trade deals in their favour that the party's over. In which case - that's a positive for the rest of us.

However - time will tell. The big banks and corporations won't give up that easily.

 

[finneyb]

One of the bigger problems in Western politics (US, UK and EU) is the almost unreported, but endemic corruption of the democratic process by lobbying. If your corporation or NGO has the dosh, it can effectively buy influence. I think Cameron once said he thought it would be the next big scandal; seems the lobbyists are clever enough to stay just below the radar. It happens quite openly and extensively, but so far nobody has moved to curtail it.

Now and again, a hint comes to light. Remember the sting against Jack Straw and Malcolm Rifkind boasting to journalists posing as lobbyists how much access they had to the decision-makers? It's become a recognised way for ex-politicians to cash in - where do you think Blair's alleged £47m property portfolio came from? Remember 'taxi for hire' Stephen Byers?

I noticed that Trump has said he won't ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, and in future will only make bi-lateral trade deals. That may be his way of signalling to the big corporations that were skewing trade deals in their favour that the party's over. In which case - that's a positive for the rest of us.

However - time will tell. The big banks and corporations won't give up that easily.

I agree to some extent. I think Trump's campaign was considerably cheaper than Clinton's. It does show that the large spends on US elections are not necessary and the politician is spending to the budget available regardless of the effectiveness of the advertising; of course there are no free meals, anyone contributing to the campaign wants a return on their investment. I have friends in US and they are all sick of the election canvassing - they have the right to phone you repeatedly and do.

A classic case is the National Rifle ***, for some reason a very powerful lobbyist, arguably too powerful, can't all be down to money they must have an effective system and probably over an extended period of time.

Then we have the likes of Arron Banks ( Farage's financial sponsor) why doesn't he come out of the closet and stand for election? very close to Trump by all accounts. His financial sponsorship, without responsibility, is certainly damaging the UK at the moment.

Brian