Forum menu
You do realise this place is make believe don’t you? Whether you know who I am or not it has little bearing on what I say here.
You seem to be trotting out a standard defence of those who enable and cheerlead violence by others as part of a political agenda. You might even believe it. Or you could be a Ukrainian teenager in his underpants surrounded by pizza boxes, or a member of the 50 cent brigade. Either way you trot out time and again tripe that justifies or enables violence against people who are elected to represent their communities.
Why don't you put your energies into getting elected so you can be the change you want to see, or is that change just making the country unsafe for those who get elected
Seriously, when you’re attempting to justify the actions of nazis and racists
Off topic but if you really think that's my position then you haven't understood.
You seem to be trotting out a standard defence
Not a defence, just a simple fact. The problem with democracy is that when it doesn't work, as it clearly isn't working in this case, then people turn to non-democratic methods. What's more offensive, an MP doubling his income by breaking the rules, abusing his position then seeking to cover it up and still getting away with it when he's caught, or someone spraying graffiti on an office? Kelvin clearly thinks it's the latter and you seem to agree, whereas I think the opposite. I'm pretty confident I'm in the majority on this point.
Blimey I was in Northampton yesterday and was shocked by the visible economic violence done to that place and its people. Political violence only leads to more repression but I can well understand a little targeted artwork.
spraying graffiti
There's a massive revolutionary fightback going on in Croydon at the moment.
Although bizarrely it seems to have only started after the Labour controlled council went bankrupt and was forced to abandon all non-statutory obligations.
Kelvin clearly thinks it’s the latter
No I don’t. I didn’t say that. I am against physical violence against MPs and their offices for the reasons I have stated quite clearly. Nothing to do with claiming it is worse than what certain politicians do.
No I don’t. I didn’t say that.
See below.
I am against physical violence against MPs and their offices
You point being? I am against the smashing up, burning down etc of MPs offices. The thing you said it is a “shame” isn’t happening. That does not mean that I think people who do so are worse than corrupt politicians.
Physical violence against an office?
To be brutally honest though, who among us wouldn’t feel the urge to do something stupid if you saw Rees-Mogg in the street with no bodyguards? Same goes for the likes of Redwood, IDS, Francois, Bridgen, Farage etc. Labour has it’s fair share too such as Austin, Streeting, Mandelson etc. Maybe what we need is a modern version of the Red Army Faction or the SLA. Those guys would be spoilt for choice today.
Seriously, grow up and drop your Che Guevara fantasies, you're embarrassing yourself.
Physical violence against an office?
“Intentional extensive physical damage” then, if you don’t like the term violence when talking about property. In this case smashing up, or burning down MPs offices, as Dazh says.
drop your Che Guevara fantasies
Whoa, I am Che.
Ernie Lynch.
It’s a great opportunity for someone but who could it be?
I don’t know the constituency [ well, I know the area well, but not the politics ], but if the opposition parties can’t get themselves sorted for a by-election, where none of them currently stand any chance of defeating a Conservative candidate on their own, it doesn’t look good for the far more difficult challenge of the next general election.
Seriously, grow up
Ah yes the age-old pretence of being all grown-up and mature. Well I'm very sorry, if being grown-up means accepting that politicians can get away with naked corruption then I'll carry on being a teenager thanks. While all you grown-ups tut and shake your head and complain about how outrageous and disgraceful it all is, the people getting rich are laughing at you. They know that all they have to do is trot out the usual bullshit of a few bad apples, maybe make a small sacrifice like throwing Paterson to the wolves, and then just carry on regardless. And all the grown-ups will swallow it hook line and sinker like they always do.
I mean, even after everything that's happened, Johnson this morning has come out and said he's not declaring his holiday in the register of MPs interests. How outrageous! How disgraceful! Something should surely be done, blah blah blah.
Is that “something” burning down MPs offices, or attacking them? No one is arguing corrupt MPs should not be challenged. We need to organise to remove them. Physically attacking any MP or their office, to cause real harm or damage, isn’t the answer. As soon as that is normal, the corrupt politicians will use it to mobilise people into attacking the hard working and not-corrupt MPs.
The pen is mightier than the sword in a civilised society.
Something should surely be done, blah blah blah.
Something was done over the last 48 hours and the government u-turned. That's minority parties objecting, people of all political persuasions writing to their MPs and the media doing a decent job of venting people's frustrations. The outcome wasn't a bad result.
On the other hand, Insulate Britian have succeeded in achieving zero so far with their direct action.
Before you conclude democracy is broken, try and run for local council or even as MP dazh and see if you can actually change things. But it's much harder to do than just sitting back and inciting others to violence. Why not try political engagement and see? You mighht even make a go of it?
Why not try political engagement and see? You mighht even make a go of it?
He might you know...
The problem with democracy is that when it doesn’t work, as it clearly isn’t working in this case, then people turn to non-democratic methods...<snipped>
I’m pretty confident I’m in the majority on this point.
if being grown-up means accepting that politicians can get away with naked corruption
It isn’t, and never has been either, and I’ve no idea where you dragged that horse turd of an idea from.
Before you conclude democracy is broken, try and run for local council or even as MP dazh and see if you can actually change things.
I wouldn't exaggerate what has happened in the last 48 hours. An attempt to change something appears to have failed due to mounting resistance, ironically much of it outside parliament. But at best we are where we were before it all kicked off.
How effective the parliamentary road is to achieve change depends on what your goals are. If your goal is merely to tinker with things here and there but to leave everything fundamentally intact then it's brilliant for that.
If your goal however is to fundamentally overhaul everything, or God forbid create a different sort of society, then forget it.
Tony Benn entered parliament as a right-wing member of the Labour Party. His experience as a parliamentarian radicalised him and he ended up challenging the existing social order.
This is what he said with regards to the power of industrialists and bankers :
Compared to this, the pressure brought to bear in industrial disputes by the unions is minuscule. This power was revealed even more clearly in 1976 when the International Monetary Fund secured cuts in our public expenditure. ... These [four] lessons led me to the conclusion that the UK is only superficially governed by MPs and the voters who elect them. Parliamentary democracy is, in truth, little more than a means of securing a periodical change in the management team, which is then allowed to preside over a system that remains in essence intact. If the British people were ever to ask themselves what power they truly enjoyed under our political system they would be amazed to discover how little it is, and some new Chartist agitation might be born and might quickly gather momentum.
I think it would be difficult to challenge the accuracy of that comment.
Something was done over the last 48 hours and the government u-turned.
So what has fundamentally changed? For his crimes Paterson is now rewarded with a nice retirement on an MPs pension and no doubt futher consultancy work and directorships, and all the other corrupt MPs continue as normal. And you think that is a good result? No, a good result would be Paterson facing prosecution and/or losing his pension and MPs being banned from taking on second jobs. Is that going to happen? Of course it isn't.
The pen is mightier than the sword in a civilised society.
There are people sleeping on the streets, kids going hungry and dependent on donations of food from strangers. There are people dying from lack of medical care, and millions barely scraping a living with no hope of ever breaking out of the poverty trap. And whilst all this goes on the people who's job it is to change this are enriching themselves and then complaining that they're being mistreated when they're caught red-handed. Civilised? Are you taking the p*ss?
Relatively speaking, the UK is a civilised country where the rule of law prevails. I understand your anger at the hideous inequality in society and the systemically rigged system but vandalism and violence won't help fix it.
Are you taking the p*ss?
No, Owen Paterson, Boris Johnson, and Jacob Rees-Mogg are. And we need to voters to realise that. And we need the opposition parties to realise that with the voting system stacked in favour of the Conservatives, they need to work together, or all the mess you describe will continue... no... get worse.
Off topic but if you really think that’s my position then you haven’t understood.
If you meant to say something else then feel free. As it stands, it looks an awful lot like "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" which in this case puts you on the same side as Donald Trump.
dazh- no one is saying the system doesn't need changing, we all agree with you on that.
But on this thread, and plenty of others, you get all frothy at the idea of civil disorder, riots and physically attacking politicians.
That's what we are disagreeing with you about, for plenty of reasons that have been explained above.
Disagreeing with your proposed methods does not mean we are happy to accept the continuation of the current broken system, and I'm assuming that you are clever enough to know that.
ironically much of it outside parliament.
The power of a Daily Mail headline
which in this case puts you on the same side as Donald Trump
It's all Trumpian playbook bollox, democracy broken, corrupt politicians, broken system. It will be "drain the swamp" and "stop the steal" next.
Says gerrymandered constituencies yet can't name one.
It will what happened in Virginia, as soon as they win all the concerns about democracy suddenly disappear
The people who stormed the Capitol were defending the US government,
Eh?
Is anyone actually that shocked by Tory behaviour being unscrupulous?
Have we forgotten everything that went before. Especially the last 18 months?
Dunt and O'Brien having a forensic field day attacking the government they effectively laid a path for when taking apart Corbyn every 15 minutes on their platforms.
Culpable.
Eh?
Trump was President, and they were trying to keep him President.
Culpable.
Do you disagree with anything James O’Brien said in that clip? He didn’t encourage people to vote for Johnson’s government at all by the way, he warned his listeners exactly why they shouldn’t be anywhere near power and why everyone, even those with a history of voting Conservative, had to vote to stop them. He also pointed out Corbyn’s shortcomings, and points out Starmer’s now (just as many of us on this forum did and do who absolutely want the current lot in government out). You don’t blind yourself to the problems of the opposition just because the government is so, so dangerous and unsuitable to run the country.
Eh?
Democracy is known by the ability to have elections and regime change peacefully. The Capitol riots were trying to stop regime change after a election which was to all intents and purposes free and fair
Trump was President,
WAS.
The Capitol riots were trying to stop regime change after a election which was to all intents and purposes free and fair
I.E. Was not in support of the government. So "The people who stormed the Capitol were defending the US government" is nonsense.
you get all frothy at the idea of civil disorder, riots and physically attacking politicians.
I said if it happened I'd find that completely unsurprising and understandable and I wouldn't be that bothered about it. Is that what you mean by frothy? Seems to me the main people being frothy are those who are weirdly and unnecessarily upset by someone spray painting a building.
vandalism and violence won’t help fix it.
This is simply untrue. Have a quick look through recent history and you'll find loads of examples where government policy was changed by violence, riots, direct action, protest and other 'undemocratic' means. In fact you could easily argue that the scale and rate of change is directly proportional to the scale of the violence which occured. There's nothing politicians fear more than a public who are unafraid of the law and willing to take matters into their own hands.
As it stands, it looks an awful lot like “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”
Feel free to quote where I said that. I can assure you I didn't. It's in your imagination.
spray painting a building.
Why do you include that with "riots and physically attacking politicians" as if it is somehow connected?
There is a time and a place for everything, including violence and armed insurrection. Now is not the time and this is not place.
Violence can only be justified when there is absolutely no other avenue.
The situation in the UK isn't even remotely close to that.
It reminds me of the nonsense those who talked about "the armed struggle" in NI came out with.
WAS.
He was still president at the time, and they were trying to keep him president. In the USA the president and government do not change straight after election. There’s another thread that details all this. Worth revisiting if you consider there was nothing wrong with what happened on that dark day. The documentary mentioned near the end of that thread, and still on iPlayer, is worth a watch.
I said if it happened I’d find that completely unsurprising and understandable and I wouldn’t be that bothered about it.
You said it was “a shame” that kind of thing didn’t happen here.
Your said…
Had they all been burnt down by an angry mob then you can bet Johnson, Rees Mogg and the rest of the pig-f*****s wouldn’t be so brazenly self-serving and indifferent. It’ll never happen though, which is a shame.
Why do you include that with “riots and physically attacking politicians” as if it is somehow connected?
It was Kelvin getting excited about the graffiti, not me. I'm entirely indifferent about it.
Violence can only be justified when there is absolutely no other avenue.
Who decides when all other avenues have been exhausted? The trouble is violence is hardly ever planned, and nor should it be. Unless it's the metropolitan police doing the planning, in which case a riot is almost always guaranteed. Violence is rarely a deliberate tactic or strategy, and it's much less justfiable when it is, as in your example of Northern Ireland. It's not even something that needs justifying, it just happens, and when it does the politicians have a choice whether to ignore it and risk more, or take note and change course. History shows they often do the latter.
I.E. Was not in support of the government. So “The people who stormed the Capitol were defending the US government” is nonsense.
Wrong. The Trump administration was in power at the time of the riot. They were attempting to prevent that government being changed for a different one.
Feel free to quote where I said that. I can assure you I didn’t. It’s in your imagination.
I didn't say you did: it's in your imagination.
This
There’s nothing politicians fear more than a public who are unafraid of the law and willing to take matters into their own hands.
is what I
mean by frothy
Wrong. The Trump administration was in power at the time of the riot. They were attempting to prevent that government being changed for a different one.
Whilst reversing an election result. Trump was a cry-baby megalomaniac trying desperately to hang onto power. It cost some people their lives.
I know it's not edgy enough for many on here, but HIGNFY just gave this story a thorough going over 👍
John Major just gave the government a better, more sustained, reflective and impactful damning on R4 this morning than Starmer has managed so far.
Gammon lobbying for bacon...
John Major just gave the government a better, more sustained, reflective and impactful damning on R4 this morning than Starmer has managed so far.
True. But he also pointed out the obvious about Brexit, which Labour politicians... hell, any politicians... who need to face the voters again are scared stiff to do.
To be brutally honest though, who among us wouldn’t feel the urge to do something stupid if you saw Rees-Mogg in the street with no bodyguards? Same goes for the likes of
Redwood,
He's my MP and knocks on my door each election (local or general). He gets a polite thanks but no thanks and a strange admiration for actually showing up. In 7 years we've had one Labour guy doorstep for the local elections, he was a full on red flag waving, momentum guy. Which is great but TBH he didn't stand a chance and I'm still not sure I wanted him to 🤣
But then that's my doorstep. Not your keyboard so an entirely different scenario ehh?
This is exactly the kind of thing I fear will come out of this …
https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1456950014874431493?s=21
John Major just gave the government a better, more sustained, reflective and impactful damning on R4 this morning than Starmer has managed so far.
Since he left office, he's actually been a voice of (relative) reason in the Tory party. And I think also the last Tory leader with a "normal" non public school background, so there may be a connection.
This is exactly the kind of thing I fear will come out of this …
More extremists feeling legitimised by reckless politicians. The culture war can escalate very suddenly, which the likes of dazh need to bear in mind.
He’s my MP and knocks on my door each election (local or general)
Your Tory MP canvasses door to door during local elections? I find that absolutely astonishing.
And if that's not astonishing enough he is John Redwood?
And I think also the last Tory leader with a “normal” non public school background, so there may be a connection.
He was also a massive hypocrite, for years shagging a married woman behind his own wife's back and then publicly launching a moral crusade which included moralising on the value of "family".
Plus of course he continued with all the privatisations that Thatcher had been unable to complete due to her premiership being cut short. It's a price which we are currently paying now.
Btw :
He was also a massive hypocrite, for years shagging a married woman behind his own wife’s back and then publicly launching a moral crusade which included moralising on the value of “family”.
I bet Boris thinks he's a legend.
Violence is rarely a deliberate tactic or strategy,
Unless it's striking workers. Tory government's have been dispensing violence to the electorate for decades.
John Major ran away from the circus to join an accountancy firm. Sort of.
He was also a massive hypocrite, for years shagging a married woman behind his own wife’s back and then publicly launching a moral crusade which included moralising on the value of “family”.
Plus of course he continued with all the privatisations that Thatcher had been unable to complete due to her premiership being cut short. It’s a price which we are currently paying now.
Absolutely true, but not really relevant to my post, especially as I'd qualified my comments about "normal" and "relative"
Whilst reversing an election result.
To keep the then current administration in power.
Absolutely true, but not really relevant to my post, especially as I’d qualified my comments about “normal” and “relative”
I wasn't aware that my comments needed to be strictly relevant to your post 😉
I merely expanded on your comment that he is apparently the voice of relative reason in the Tory Party by pointing out that he is also a massive hypocrite.
But if you want me to focus more on what you said I can probably do that. You also said :
And I think also the last Tory leader with a “normal” non public school background, so there may be a connection.
I know you only said "there may be a connection" but I don't see any at all.
The most reactionary, callous, racist, and right-wing Tories, tend to come from working-class/lower middle-class backgrounds having received state education. The Margret Thatchers and Norman Tebbits of this world.
In contrast the more socially liberal least racist Tories with stronger social-democratic leanings tend come from upper-class backgrounds and have been privately educated. The Harold Macmillans and Michael Heselstines of this world.
Obviously I am generalising massively and you will of course find exceptions but class background and education can provide a reasonable expectation of whether a Tory is Thatcherite or more One Nation.
Oohh look peerages again
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1457062270924644357?t=xdZ9c0IioieyEjHNy5oizg&s=19
On the subject of which Paterson can never get the peerage he undoubtedly believes is his due. 😂
I thought the cash for peerages was common knowledge. I'm just surprised that it is so cheap.
So "cash-for-honours" is another idea Johnson has pinched from Labour.
Does he have no shame?
Tbh I really don't get why Johnson won't reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
Its going to come out eventually, he's just tossing another log on his own pyre
Even my brexit loving dad was slagging Johnson off today, which is a first
So “cash-for-honours” is another idea Johnson has pinched from Labour.
It goes back far further.
The most depressing thing is how it is sold so cheaply and only benefits the political parties involved. We should do the job properly and charge a proper amount with the cash going into general taxation.
Its going to come out eventually, he’s just tossing another log on his own pyre
Its been reported as being 25k a week when they rent it out to the general public (general in this case being rather well off).
it goes back far further.
I'm sure it goes way back, possibly back to Roman times.
But in recent history cash-for-honours is very much associated with Labour. A quick google of the term 'cash-for-honours" will reveal that.
Tony Blair is the only British Prime Minister to have ever been questioned by police investigating political corruption. That was a direct result of cash-for-honours.
Ah, yes, Johnson’s blatant corruption, and attempts to shut down scrutiny of him, are Labour’s fault. Of course. That’s a get out of jail card that seems to never expire.
Why do you say it's Labour fault?
Labour never forced Johnson to embrace the idea of cash-for-honours.
Labour are no more responsible for the behaviour of the Tory Party than the Tories are responsible for the behaviour the Labour Party.
I bet Boris thinks he’s a legend
I bet he thinks he’s an amateur
Just because you are 'good' at 'debating', doesn't mean you have anything interesting to say.
I'm almost sure that that goes back to Greek times.
Labour are no more responsible for the behaviour of the Tory Party than the Tories are responsible for the behaviour the Labour Party.
I am no more responsible for saying this says nothing than saying nothing is responsible for me saying nothing.
Tony Blair is the only British Prime Minister to have ever been questioned by police investigating political corruption. That was a direct result of cash-for-honours.
The chances of him being the only one that should be investigated for political corruption are somewhere around zero to **** all.
I’m almost sure that that goes back to Greek times.
Further than that, it’d be as soon as someone was in a position to gain something through political corruption. Which means more or less, as soon as politicians exist.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/25152765?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents?
Doesn’t really matter what system you have in place, humans will fall to corruption every time.
Tony Blair is the only British Prime Minister to have ever been questioned by police investigating political corruption. That was a direct result of cash-for-honours.
That's only due to the London Police being more circumspect around Prime Ministers and chaps doing the right thing when found out in Lloyd George's day.
The chances of him being the only one that should be investigated for political corruption are somewhere around zero to **** all.
Hence my point concerning the obvious lack of uniqueness when it comes to dodgy dealings.
Although in the specific case of cash-for-honours that is very much associated with Labour. In fact it is precisely because it was such a huge issue under Blair that it was impossible for met police to ignore.
Mind you Tony Blair was a master at cash-for-favours, literally within weeks of becoming Prime Minister he was embroiled in the Bernie Ecclestone slesze scandal.
We need to see how things pan out and whether Johnson's premiership matches New Labour's for sleaze.
Tbh I really don’t get why Johnson won’t reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
Yep, I don’t get it, it’s trivial stuff, like the wallpaper, but the whole going thru Machiavellian manoeuvres to hide it seems insane.
I put it down to a spoilt childish arrogance and contempt of being held to account but it’s definitely a slippery path,changing the system on a whim.
A subtle removing of checks and measures here and there, for the good of the country and all,you know having the power for the goverment to put it right when the court gets it wrong,for the peoples good of course.
Tbh I really don’t get why Johnson won’t reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
For a normal person embarrassment may be a factor - but clearly not going to be a factor for Johnson.
It’s got to be some sort of game he’s playing after it looks like history repeating itself with his Mustique holiday or his decorating fandango.
Seems odd to be putting yourself thru the same farce again,most people would take an easier course after being burnt a few times before.
We need to see how things pan out and whether Johnson’s premiership matches New Labour’s for sleaze.
easily
Although to be fair to Johnson he is just carrying on the tradition from Cameron. That said overriding the committee to get Cruddas in was pretty special.
However pretty much zero chance there will be another case like the one against Blair since at that time the CPS said it would need clear evidence of an offer which didnt happen then and wont happen here either so no point the police wasting their time launching an investigation. Only way I reckon it could happen is if some existing donor decided to record the conversations.
Michael Heseltine was someone who was widely sniped about as being the kind of fellow who'd "bought his own furniture".
With a bit of luck the government mismanagement of the Paterson issue will be the straw that breaks Alexander's camel. Although quite why Starmer and the Labour party aren't making more of all of this escapes me.
That said overriding the committee to get Cruddas in was pretty special.
Yup, totally agree, and typical of Johnson's contempt for democratic practices.
Tony Blair's special moment imo was when he decided that receiving a million quid was more important than the wider health considerations of the nation.
Tony Blair personally intervened to secure an exemption for formula one from a tobacco advertising ban just hours after meeting the sport's boss, Bernie Ecclestone, according to Whitehall documents.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/12/tonyblair-labour
He obviously thought that banning tobacco advertising was really quite important. But not if you give us a million quid.
Tbh I really don’t get why Johnson won’t reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
Taking a free jolly off one of your rich mates that would cost more than a lot of families annual income isn’t a good luck even for someone as shameless as Johnson
Tbh I really don’t get why Johnson won’t reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
"Cost" is not the right word (i'm in pedant mode here btw). The cost to Johnson was zero, that is the whole bloomin point. It also cost* [shadowy company apparently beneficially owned by Goldsmith/his family] virtually nothing (probably the cost of cleaning a few red wine stains etc.) to allow Boris to stay there, as they own it. They didn't pay the rent to a third party on his behalf (in which case it would have been a cost to them).
This was the provision of a benefit-in-kind. According to the rules, benefits in kind must be disclosed and the disclosure must include the "value"(paras 7(a) and 9(d)). In the absence of any guidance about calculating the value, that would be interpreted as the market value I imagine. So it wouldn't matter if Goldsmith said "The place wasn't being rented out that week anyway, so it cost* me nothing". If it was a slow part of the season, that would affect the market value of course.
*a benefit foregone, you might call it a "loss of income" is not a cost in strict terms, though often the word is used for that.