Labour’s rebuttal to the Green party this week sums up the double standard that dogs our politics
Frances RyanWhy is it that the politics of hope offered up by the left is dismissed as naive, while the policies of the centre and right are portrayed as all that is possible?
Because the left is proffering pie in the sky bullshit.
The idea that government is competent enough to do thing that will all be paid for by the rich is bullshit. So, there we are.
Simples.
Research by Cardiff University found Reform featured in a quarter of all BBC News at Ten bulletins between January and July this year, whereas the Liberal Democrats – the third party in parliament with 14 times the number of MPs as Reform – featured in just 17.9% of bulletins. Meanwhile, Farage’s party was referenced in just under 20% of ITV News at Ten bulletins, compared with just 6.2% for the Lib Dems.
Anyone care to guess what proportion of those bulletins and references to Reform were in any way positive?
Depends what you mean by positive, doesn’t it?. No doubt the bulletins are informing the public about Reform’s “failings”. Meanwhile the actual public are cheering & yelling “Yay! Give us more. Give us more”
Yes. Not a Brit so I can’t vote for him, let alone twice.
Id also say that Farage is a lot more active. I couldn’t name a single thing that separates the LDs from Labour.
They’re even more mendacious.
Possibly. What I mean is that there’s no difference in ethos. Which is a classic left thing.
Reform only exists because the Tories fucked the “broad church” thing.
Media coverage seems fairly representative in my opinion. LibDems are just complaining that more popular people are more popular.
It is also far easier to make unfeasible promises when one has no chance of getting into power.
The Greens found this out the hard way in Germany. When they joined in coalition with the SPD, they found most of their policies unfeasible and the ones they did get through led to ruination.
“Hope” sounds like a great strategy for governing a country… glad we have such intellectual titans amongst us.
Obama ran on – and won – with “Hope and change.”
Obama ran on “My skin is dark and my name’s not Bush”, which was enough to win him two terms and a Nobel.
Perhaps because history has shown us that the politics offered up by the left usually ends up with millions of people dead?
The current champion of the left told women the could hypnotise them into having bigger boobs, and if that’s not pie in the sky, Francis, I don’t know what is!
If he was based the media would mention this in every interview or quote.
Perhaps he should have hypnotised their (male) partners into <b>thinking</b> that they were bigger, which to my mind would have possibly been more successful.
We should refer to him as the titnotist.
Hypnotits was suggested by someone on here, a week or two ago.
Not just naive, also stupid, ignorant and fantastical. Not to mention malignant, poisonous and ruinous.
Primarily impractical, which leads to the rest. As Sowell says, the most important point about the Left’s ideas is that they don’t work.
Roughly speaking, this is why women buy homeopathy and go palm reading and men don’t. And why the Green Party is overwhelmingly female except for The Boob Charmer.
Because men, at least a bit, check the math. A lot of chicks are about the “feels”.
When it comes to boobs I’m all for feels. Or even “feels”.
Do men pay fifty quid (at least) for a tube of moisturiser with no proof of any positive results? Well, some men do, but the cosmetics counter is generally a monument to the gullibility of the female side.
It’s an arms race between women, and they view anything that might help them look a bit better than some other bird will be paid for (see also, luxury handbags at £1000 a go).
There’s a thing. My girl’s into pricey handbags. She has a Louis Vuitton worth about 4K amongst others.* I tell her it makes her look cheap because it has that LV on the outside, so everyone knows what it is. Style is unmarked, so only the cognoscenti know what it is. The un-stylish are peasants, don’t count & can be ignored. However true style, even the stylish don’t know who made it. They just wish they did so they could get one.
Of course, fucking foreigner. She’ll never understand style. You don’t impress people by trying to impress people. If you need to try, don’t bother.
*No. She buys them with her money.
Yeah. These products are marketed as “this is what the rich and stylish have” and you get Kardashians etc being paid to push them. But the rich and stylish actually buy a whole lot of other stuff. Stuff that doesn’t have any names on the outside.
You don’t have to be that rich. But you do need an eye for style. I’ve tried to point her in the direction Lanvin if she must buy label. Brand name very discrete & the cat motif, recognised by those who recognise Lanvin. It’s the designs that stand out. Simple elegance. Half the price of LV. LV’s a mounting for the logo.
My French ex was very good at this. It’s not the individual items. It’s how they’re put together. She could look fantastic dressing out of C&A.
My daughter told a story of some friends who had to stay overnight unexpectedly due to some unforseen circumstance. The girl that was left without a change of clothes came down to breakfast looking amazing wearing one of her boyfriend’s shirts with something tied around the middle.
The ex was big on silk scarves. Wore one with pretty well anything. Wound round the neck, loose round the neck, tied round the waste, tied to the handle on a handbag… That bit of colour made something boring interesting. I s’pose she had a dozen or so. Doubt if they were more than 10 quid each. Probably equivalent to spending 5K on clothes, for the effect.
The Frogs are mad keen on homeopathy, too. Yet they have (or have had) many great mathematicians.
Conservatism once embodied national pride and preservation, but the new right is selling despair and destruction. The very people who have long accused leftwingers of “talking Britain down” now speak of “no-go areas” and of migrants raping young women.
Is your contention that these statements are invalid? Are Grooming Gangs a myth? Conservatism still embodies national pride. I’m however horrified that we have traitors like yourself that consider the creation of ISIS controlled enclaves and the rape of young women by Migrants is an acceptable price to pay to satisfy your utopian fantasies.
When leftwing politicians make the case for better living conditions for ordinary people, they have long been met with accusations that their pledges are “undeliverable” (or when things get really hysterical, that they’re a communist spy). Policies that favour the interests of the working class are routinely dismissed as a fantasy, whereas those that push wealth and power towards the rich come to be seen as a realistic status quo.
The fact the intelligence services found no evidence that Jez Corbin was a Czech spy speaks to their incompetence but also the very real possibility in that the StB didn’t need to recruit him because he worked so seamlessly towards Soviet goals.
The policies being proposed by the Greens are a fantasy. Removal of private landlords? Closure of all Army bases? Creation of a Green Hedge to defend the country? An end to reliable electrical power? How are these even vaguely realistic?
The mess gives an insight into how hard it is for the left to lobby for any sort of progress, even (or especially) when it’s with its own side. Or, to put it another way: Britain has a Labour government at last and we are still arguing whether children should go hungry.
That such a thing is a “debate” is depressing. Yet the truth is, it is a good day if the left is allowed to join in the conversation. While the hard right manages to paint mass deportations as a mainstream idea, leftwing – or even centre-left – thinking is routinely excluded from public discussion
I don’t think arguing that the state paying for meals for children is good economics is saying that children should go hungry. And given the BBC has been proven to be on the extreme Left, and Channel 4 frequently goes into the Control Left area of Richard Murphy like ideas, alongside the ubiquitous Guardian/ Independent, as well as the Hard Left Sky News – how can anyone conclude ‘Leftwing theory’ gets ‘excluded from public discussion’?
The Hard Left has total control of the media, education, museums, academia and ‘ideas never get heard’?
The growth in support for the Greens and Zohran Mamdani’s recent mayoral victory in New York suggests voters are beginning to question the idea that positive change is unattainable. Policies that are dismissed by the establishment as radical and unworkable, from rent controls to nationalised energy (both of which the majority of Britons support), are seen by much of the public as mainstream and logical.
rent controls are of course implementable but they have been an unmitigated disaster wherever they have been tried. And the notion that energy prices are caused by ‘insufficient intervention’ in the Market by government is the real fantasy.
Ryan is demented. Only the use of spell check prevents her being on a par with Murphy.
People say that the sort of turds who write for the Guardian and Beeb are spoilt brat Arts graduates. They always seem to me to be the sort of people who didn’t allow their ideas to be scrutinised in discussion in their Common Rooms. If they’d had the courage to join the clever corner of my Common Room in my fresher year they’d have been utterly demolished. But then we were engineers, scientists, mathematicians, vets, lawyers and – believe it or not – an economic historian.
To begin with we had had medics amongst us but they drifted away, preferring to form a circle of their own. A pity: although they lacked scientific curiosity they included some able chaps. Able enough, presumably, to recognise that they ought to practise mutual back-scratching – Americans have taken to calling it “networking” – if they hoped to go far in medicine.
I think you’re painting a very rosy picture, dearieme. If I’ve got your age right, you were at university in the nascence of all this shit. Yours was the cohort championed the requirement of a university degree to enter politics. And graduate politicians have been a blight on UK politics ever since. As have graduate journalists. The products of its universities have destroyed your country. As I’ve mentioned many times before, there are still only 3 British PM’s elected since the war who weren’t educated at Oxford (You’ve racked up another 3 since I first broached the subject) A period’s seen the decline of the UK from being a world power to a virtually bankrupt third world shithole.That other countries have suffered.the same infestation doesn’t recommend it.
They always seem to me to be the sort of people who didn’t allow their ideas to be scrutinised in discussion in their Common Rooms. If they’d had the courage to join the clever corner of my Common Room in my fresher year they’d have been utterly demolished. But then we were engineers, scientists, mathematicians, vets, lawyers and – believe it or not – an economic historian.
This is the essential problem. A bunch of know nothings, straight out of school, on a mission to change the world. Why don’t they just STFU until they’ve the experience to understand what they want to change?
In our world, the real world, we don’t listen to the apprentice telling us how to do the job. We tell him to go make the tea & when he’s done that, sweep the floor.
Because there ARE no-go areas* and migrants committing horrific crimes.
*Somalia and others have established colonies on British Isles. Fair turnabout?
Policies that favour the interests of the working class are routinely dismissed as a fantasy,
Such as Brexit, immigration in the net 10’s of thousand, and affordable electricity.
whereas those that push wealth and power towards the rich come to be seen as a realistic status quo.
Such as mass migration, Net Zero and “human rights” lawyers.
Policies that favour unionised over non-unionised labour are routinely adopted by Labour governments
The Swedes appear to want to be the early adopters of sky pie manifestation. As well as having over a quarter of its population foreign born (it’s okay, they don’t collect data on ethnicity) Sweden has gone full in on funding green schemes with pension funds:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/net-zero/sweden-net-zero-pension-push-cautionary-tale-britain/
No surprise it’s a disaster. We know the festering tuber will carry on vomiting this madness but will our current government actually do it?
Ms/r E Do little. (Green (Brighton Pier))
Right. Hon C Licken. (Lab (East Bromwich) Sec of state etc etc. –
Sir (Donald) Humphrey: