[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
Subject   (new thread)
File  []
>> No. 92282 Anonymous
12th February 2021
Friday 8:11 pm
92282 spacer
Perhaps the problem with Labour wasn't actually Jeremy Corbyn?
103 posts and 11 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92487 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 5:26 pm
92487 spacer
Despite the idiotic contribution of Shaun "The poor will just spend any money you give them on drugs, I know this because that's what I would have done" Bailey, both Leeds and London are poised to try out UBI schemes.
>> No. 92488 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 5:47 pm
92488 spacer
>Set up a new UK Infrastructure Bank in Leeds

When they advertise jobs do you reckon this will be on the usual Civil Service portal?

>> No. 92489 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 6:09 pm
92489 spacer

I don't know if I've finally hit the 'tories might be ok' age, or if this is just what a conservative budget is capable of when a world-changing disease blights the land, but I suppose I can't complain.
>> No. 92490 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 6:13 pm
92490 spacer

>> No. 92491 Anonymous
3rd March 2021
Wednesday 6:19 pm
92491 spacer
The Tories aren't really so bad, provided you're not a poor person or a public sector worker. The impression that Starmer gave in his response to the Budget was that Labour are squarely the party for public sector workers and those on benefits, the rest don't matter to them.

>> No. 90725 Anonymous
6th October 2020
Tuesday 5:49 pm
90725 spacer
>Mr Johnson also channeled the spirit of Thatcher's 1980s revolution by pledging to save the dream of home ownership for a new generation, with the government underwriting 95 per cent mortgages for around two million first-time buyers.

>The government has yet to give details, but it seems some of the 'stress test' rules imposed on banks after the 2008 financial crisis could be relaxed to facilitate long-term fixed rate mortgages at 95 per cent of a property's value. The government could instead accept some of the risk through a guarantee scheme - although this would leave the taxpayer on the hook for potentially huge sums.

https://www.If I post a link to this website again I will be banned..co.uk/news/article-8810043/Boris-Johnson-sets-vision-post-Covid-Britain.html

Let's overheat the housing market further by softening the measures brought in as a result of the financial crisis. What could possibly go wrong?
72 posts and 8 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92447 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 11:23 am
92447 spacer

I hate this shit. Deposit is not the issue. I have just under £30k saved but 4.5x my salary gets me nothing.
>> No. 92448 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 12:36 pm
92448 spacer

It's almost as if the government are propping up the property market for the benefit of boomer BtL scum.
>> No. 92449 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 3:08 pm
92449 spacer
I'm not sure having banks lend more, with the resulting rise in interest, would be a good idea. The 5% mortgage and Help to Buy are mental enough and will no doubt cause problems in a rising interest rate scenario while bumping house prices.

I'm in a similar situation living in London but have found that if you go outside of the South-East it's not so bad. If the government had instead stumped up on making these places viable by encouraging employers to offer a guaranteed option of living in the provinces then it would be much more sustainable.

I don't see how this would help BtL. These programmes are for first-time buyers.
>> No. 92450 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 3:28 pm
92450 spacer
>It is not restricted to first-time buyers or new-build homes, but there will be a £600,000 limit.
>> No. 92451 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 3:57 pm
92451 spacer
Why wouldn't they? Many politicians are landlords, the Tories get a substantial amount of donations from property developers and the higher property prices go up, the more the government will be paid back by people who took out Help to Buy mortgages.

>> No. 92429 Anonymous
21st February 2021
Sunday 7:35 pm
92429 spacer
This woman is going to be the next president of the United States and it's going to be fucking awesome mediocre.
Expand all images.
>> No. 92430 Anonymous
21st February 2021
Sunday 7:39 pm
92430 spacer

I appreciate that America is a bit of an easy target now with Biden in charge, but I wouldn't wish this much misery on them.
>> No. 92431 Anonymous
22nd February 2021
Monday 12:13 am
92431 spacer

The racism here seems a little less casual than our usual. Are you sure you two are here legally?
>> No. 92432 Anonymous
22nd February 2021
Monday 12:33 am
92432 spacer

It's not racism, we hate her because ACAB.

>> No. 92424 Anonymous
20th February 2021
Saturday 4:05 pm
92424 spacer
I dislike how populism has evolved as a term since 2016. What brought this feeling on was how the wikipedia page has changed in recent history having landed on it today:
Compared to 2015:

The term seems to be increasingly used very much in the pejorative and as a diagnosis for people being misled rather than as a genuine label for social change without necessarily revolution. This might just be a reaction to recent history and intellectuals doing their usual business of tracing everything back to Rome but I do believe that the negativity of populism may be used to suppress grassroots or common societies based on delivering improvements or maintaining the common wellbeing. Left-wing populism has certainly failed to take proper root recently and the polarisation of the term may stop it ever being the case - in an American context that would certainly be welcomed by the Democratic establishment but a setback for the working class.

Under my own lens I'd label mutual organisations, unions and farmers markets as populist. Equally movements to redress imbalances of power or even just impose regulatory standards could be considered as populist - Occupy Wallstreet starting as a rage against the moral hazard of bail outs would certainly not be left-wing. It's a very dangerous and nebulous term but one that I think represents an unspoken enforcement of the social contract as people interpret it distinct from power relationships.

Anyway, I found it weird that they replaced 'Il Quarto Stato' with an Occupy Wall Street sign.
Expand all images.
>> No. 92425 Anonymous
20th February 2021
Saturday 4:32 pm
92425 spacer
I just hit on a quote from Frank Furedi that summarises some of this perfectly:

>Political psychology has often served as a medium for diseasing the demos, and by implication democracy itself. In the nineteenth century, psychologists developed theories of the crowed, which stressed the irrational and destructive behaviour of the urban mobs.
>In the current era, citizens supporting so-called populist parties are diagnosed as possessing toxic authoritarian personalities...Psychologies contribution to the silent war against democracy has been in serving to de-politicise and medicalise the behaviour of its target. Views that inspire and motivate popular movements are dismissed as the outcome of psychological pathologies - narcissism, irrationalism, deluded fantasy - rather than legitimate political responses to public problems.

In a Marxist critique of Adam Curtis on Youtube of all places.
>> No. 92426 Anonymous
20th February 2021
Saturday 6:18 pm
92426 spacer
Yeah, I agree. I can sum it up more succinctly: "Populist" is now an establishmentarian dogwhistle that means "thick povvos who can't be trusted to vote how they were meant to".

The problem is, in my opinion, that both left and right wing populism tend to feature some nationalist rhetoric, whether in the form of straight up xenophobia, or just a more vague labour protectionism. As far as the establishment are concerned, that cannot be tolerated. No matter which way you slice it, the interests of the lower classes are at odds with the interests of a globalist ruling class, and a great amount of political discourse is devoted to obscuring and diverting attention away from that fundamental conflict.

>> No. 92356 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 5:50 pm
92356 Brexshit
If a referendum were called on Britain's membership of the EU, which way would you vote?

56 posts and 4 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92422 Anonymous
20th February 2021
Saturday 10:35 am
92422 spacer

>> No. 92423 Anonymous
20th February 2021
Saturday 10:46 am
92423 spacer
>What's your point?
A mixture of a desire to see if anyone agrees/disagrees with that version of events because I might learn something, suspicion it might be of interest to some, and perhaps a little bit of the view that Britain has been a barrier to a unified Europe more generally.

>The point we are discussing is that there was no elucidation over what Brexit, to the Tories, actually meant
We do however know what it didn't mean: Stay in the EU or de-facto stay in the EU via the EEA. Labour screwed up massively by their pro-remain elements trying to fudge the issue in a way that would get them back into Europe, instead of keeping their 2017 position of negotiating the least bad Brexit possible with no second referendum. Labour's 2019 platform managed to be the opposite of all things to all men: Remainers saw a party prepared to negotiate Brexit, Leavers saw a party trying to claw it away with a second referendum, and the indifferent knew they were split like a fat lad's jeans.

Had pro-EU types been more subtle and competent they could just possibly have nudged us back into the EEA, but they blew it and once everything went up in the air the Tory Brexiteers got a blank cheque.
(Full disclosure: Voted Labour, Remain.)
>> No. 92427 Anonymous
21st February 2021
Sunday 1:55 am
92427 spacer
I voted for brexit when I was in a kind of aburdist-nihilistic phase, so I wanted my news to be more entertaining. Recently, my nan left me a sizeable inheritance and I think it'd be nice to live somewhere sunny and warm, so I would now vote remain.

I remember watching an interview with Jacob Rees-Mogg where he said that Britain would only start feeling the economic benefits from leaving the EU fifty years from now. As a member of the gentry, he's insulated from regular concerns and can obviously think along long-term lines (no shortage of willing suitors to carry forward that noble weak chin), but if I had voted leave for a legitimate reason, I would've been pretty pissed off at only being able to reap the benefits of brexit around the time when I can scarcely remember my own name and might need a diaper.
>> No. 92428 Anonymous
21st February 2021
Sunday 1:19 pm
92428 spacer

You assert that poor people are too stupid to think long-term, while simultaneously proving that.
>> No. 92433 Anonymous
22nd February 2021
Monday 12:07 pm
92433 spacer
Might need a what, definitely-not-a-yanklad?

brexit unicorn.jpg
>> No. 91916 Anonymous
15th January 2021
Friday 1:42 pm
91916 spacer

Has there been one single actual advantage of Brexit yet?
193 posts and 28 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92146 Anonymous
1st February 2021
Monday 12:55 pm
92146 spacer

>> No. 92147 Anonymous
1st February 2021
Monday 5:54 pm
92147 spacer
VISA have apparently not yet got any plans to increase their fees yet, but wouldnt be surprising if they did the same next financial year.
>> No. 92166 Anonymous
3rd February 2021
Wednesday 1:41 pm
92166 spacer

Boris Making the case for being in the EU today.
>> No. 92338 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 12:03 pm
92338 spacer
Oh goodie, it looks like Brexiters are pushing to bring back brexit.

>Talks to rebuild security cooperation with the EU must restart now after the Brexit deal left the UK “less safe and less secure”, a Conservative group says.
>> No. 92339 Anonymous
18th February 2021
Thursday 12:36 pm
92339 spacer
By 'the Brexiters', are you referring to the parliamentary group of Europhilic Conservatives?

>> No. 92239 Anonymous
7th February 2021
Sunday 5:33 am
92239 spacer
What do you think will happen in the near future to our world, Britbroes? Say, 20-30 years from now?

I'm scared, Britbroes.

t. American
31 posts and 2 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92277 Anonymous
9th February 2021
Tuesday 2:18 pm
92277 spacer

We're definitely going to get on top of COVID within the next couple of years, so we should be enjoying crisp refreshing pints in a sunny beer garden by 2023 at the latest. Massive advances in genomics and deep learning will lead to an unprecedented boom in medical technology. Affordable VR headsets with near-perfect visual clarity are in the pipeline and should become mainstream within a few years. When the Chinese finally take over the world, at least we'll have a competent government. WE'RE GOING TO MARS! Weed is inevitably going to get legalised because we desperately need the tax revenues. BoJo is going to die of mega-chlamydia from all the unprotected knobbing.
>> No. 92278 Anonymous
10th February 2021
Wednesday 1:54 am
92278 spacer

That really hasn't convinced me not to kill myself.
>> No. 92279 Anonymous
10th February 2021
Wednesday 2:19 am
92279 spacer
>unprecedented boom in medical technology

I'm still half-hoping that we get biological immortality in our lifetimes. Even if it takes 200 years.
I'll settle for a few decades being young again before dronelad drops the ISS on me in a poorly executed plot to close Gatwick.
>> No. 92280 Anonymous
11th February 2021
Thursday 9:27 pm
92280 spacer
A more likely scenario is kids bombing their school from orbit using a hacked satellite because their homework was late.
>> No. 92281 Anonymous
11th February 2021
Thursday 10:24 pm
92281 spacer

Interestingly, someone hacked (a system on) the ISS using AX.25 and a fucking bash command injection bug and posted it on twitter so I'm fairly sure that properly weaponised autism is fully capable of hijacking a satellite or two.

This is exactly why I should have got a commodore amiga instead of a SNES when I was nine.

>> No. 92213 Anonymous
6th February 2021
Saturday 11:45 am
92213 spacer
Boris Johnson planning NHS England overhaul, leaked paper shows

Boris Johnson is planning a radical overhaul of NHS England, as he reverses controversial privatisation policies introduced by David Cameron, a leaked document suggests. According to the draft white paper, the government is planning to reduce the role of the private sector in NHS England and give the health secretary greater control.

NHS commissioners would not be required to put contracts out to tender, which can draw competition from competing health groups. Instead, a new policy would leave the NHS and local authorities to run services and encourage them to work together more effectively. The health secretary would also take more direct control over NHS England, with the plans putting emphasis on reducing bureaucracy and improving integration between the different departments of the NHS.

25 posts and 2 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92240 Anonymous
7th February 2021
Sunday 7:05 am
92240 spacer
There is a strong electoral case for this though: One recognised tendency in British politics has always been that when people are sick of the Tories, nice middle class Tory types will vote Liberal and help Labour get in that way. At every election where Labour has taken power except 1997 the Liberals have also gained votes. (Up 0.9% in 1923, 5.8% in 1929, 2.3% in 1945, 5.3% in 1964, 11.8% in 1974, and down 1% in 1997.)
1997 leaves the question: Did Labour win Liberals, or Tories? Was there a "Tories go Liberal, Liberals go Labour" effect, or did Labour win over Tories while Liberals stuck to Ashdown?

But then in 2001 and 2005 things go all weirdy wobbly with the Lib Dems running to the left of Labour on all sorts of issues and even the Conservatives having a pop at it on tuition fees (opportunism, but they still did it!). Then 2010 happened and we all know how that went.

Anyway, it's a shame our Labour party didn't follow the trajectory of New Zealand: Labour there did Thatcherism from 1984-90, got it all out of their system and caused untold social harm in the process, sold off the trains and the planes despite promising they wouldn't. People were sufficiently upset (about the social harm, not the vehicles) that Labour feared coming third in the 1990 election, so were overjoyed when they merely went down to the biggest defeat of a sitting government in their nation's history.
Then in they came back to power in 1999 and mixed the electorally useful parts of Blairism (mostly late-TV era campaign techniques) with policies like renationalising the trains and the planes, creating a state owned bank, abolishing workfare, creating tax credits but branding them properly so people actually know what on earth they are, calling the Iraq war illegal, and more.
In part as a result of delivering a government that most people can basically agree was alright within living memory, NZ Labour returned to govt in 2017. Unlike UK Labour, which is spiraling the plughole like a discount Lloyd George Liberal.
>> No. 92258 Anonymous
8th February 2021
Monday 1:36 am
92258 spacer
>Why were Deloitte offered untendered contracts to provide services that the NHS could have easily provided?

Because the idea the NHS is set up to do any of thesr things is wrong in the first place.
>> No. 92265 Anonymous
8th February 2021
Monday 3:22 pm
92265 spacer

>The NHS isn't set up to do medical testing or medical surveillance on the British Public but some rando consulting firm is.

u wot 8?
>> No. 92266 Anonymous
8th February 2021
Monday 3:45 pm
92266 spacer
>at you fully think it is 100% okay to hate specific groups of people, as long as they're the groups you've been told deserve it because of their privilege rank according to identity politics. That is your brain on liberalism.

That sounds so completely bonkers to me, I hate to go full no true scotsman, but that violates the very core pricipals of liberalism.

I accept that the term liberal has probably been co-opted by a paticular type of arsehole, and that arsehole considers classical liberals to be closet racists and sexists but usually those people self identify as left first rather than liberal.
>> No. 92270 Anonymous
9th February 2021
Tuesday 9:12 am
92270 spacer

Yeah, this one was all those things you usually associate with a radical twitter leftie, except socialism was the bit she objected to.

That's what was so vexing and why I found her so repulsive. I can tolerate and to some extent understand those sorts when they eanestly believe it's all part of one big package to make society fairer overall, but this one specifically and consciously wanted neo-liberal capitalism as it exists today to carry on as normal, just with more women and minorities in the 1%.

>> No. 84456 Anonymous
23rd September 2018
Sunday 8:38 pm
84456 Ban anonymous accounts, Angela Rayner tells social media firms

>The shadow education secretary, speaking at a Labour party conference event, said social media firms should take greater responsibility for their users and noted in particular that Facebook seemed to have indicated that politicians should accept a higher level of abuse.

>Rayner, at a fringe event organised by the Guardian, conceded that insisting on real names wouldn’t stop abuse, but “it would certainly help a little bit. I think they should do more – they do have a responsibility for online.”

I... kind of like Angela Rayner, but this is a truly awful idea that seems to have had absolutely no thought put into its implementation or wider affects on freedom of expression. Technically almost every single account commenting on The Guardian is an "anonymous" social media account because why would you use a real name for such a thing.

I really hope this doesn't gain any kind of traction.
97 posts and 11 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92208 Anonymous
4th February 2021
Thursday 8:39 pm
92208 spacer


Get on your knees and grovel, you worthless maggot.
>> No. 92209 Anonymous
4th February 2021
Thursday 10:25 pm
92209 spacer

Fuck me this is even more disappointing than the whole Keith Starmer premiership.

I saw her kneeling in her New Rock boots and tights though. Very sexy. I'm not saying I want her to literally stand on my testicles and smash them into oblivion, but I'm in the same postcode.
>> No. 92210 Anonymous
4th February 2021
Thursday 10:46 pm
92210 spacer
You don't want to come between Rayner and her footwear.

>> No. 92211 Anonymous
4th February 2021
Thursday 10:59 pm
92211 spacer
This picture has brought up some not entirely unpleasant teenage memories. I wonder if she listens to Bad Religion.
>> No. 92212 Anonymous
5th February 2021
Friday 9:09 am
92212 spacer

She's the council estate goth lass of our collective dreams, even if she doesn't have big jugs any more.


Saggy Pissflaps.png
>> No. 92148 Anonymous
1st February 2021
Monday 6:00 pm
92148 Centralisation
This is a post by the founder of telegram, I thought this was a very interesting idea worth sharing and is a good way to contextualise the current fucked up state of the world.

>The "capitalism <-> socialism" opposition seems outdated. I prefer to think in terms of "centralization vs decentralization". Humans have evolved to perform best in small groups of less than 150 people. That's why wherever there's centralization and excessive hierarchy, there's inefficiency and underutilized human potential. Capitalist monopolies and socialist dictatorships are equally bad.

>In a natural environment, every small community is able to produce an outstanding leader and an independent thinker. In today's world of trillion-dollar monopolies and bloated governments, the potential of hundreds of millions of people is suppressed by the limitations imposed by our artificial societal structures.

>That is the reason why tens of thousands of people working at big corporations such as Facebook have failed to keep up with what our small team at Telegram has been implementing. That’s also the reason why countries like Russia fail to generate and retain global brands in their jurisdictions. Genuine creativity is rare in organizations and societies built on excessive hierarchies and lack of personal autonomy.
2 posts omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92151 Anonymous
1st February 2021
Monday 6:36 pm
92151 spacer
At least Facebook would have posted this somewhere indexable by Google.
>> No. 92152 Anonymous
1st February 2021
Monday 6:43 pm
92152 spacer
>the current fucked up state of the world

Pandemic aside, there has never been a better time to be alive than now. The past - even the relatively recent past - was shit.

If you want to seriously address the question of where we're going wrong, you need to meaningfully engage with all the ways that we're getting things very right. We're living longer and healthier lives than any generation of humans in history. Global poverty and child mortality have never been lower. The world today is more democratic and has more respect for human rights than ever before.

There's nothing wrong with being idealistic, but it's incredibly dangerous to let that idealism turn into a nihilistic black-and-white view of social progress. There are many ways that the world could be made better, but there are many more ways that the world could be made much worse.
>> No. 92153 Anonymous
1st February 2021
Monday 6:53 pm
92153 spacer
He's described as the "Russian Zuckerberg", and that diatribe makes it seem like an apt description. I'll bet he's into buttcoins as well.
>> No. 92154 Anonymous
1st February 2021
Monday 7:40 pm
92154 spacer
>He's described as the "Russian Zuckerberg"

He was forced out of his own company and into exile for refusing to hand over personal data on protestors and opposition politicians in Russia and Ukraine.
Say what you like about him, but at least he has good principals and is running his business to them as best as he can.
Meanwhile there seems to be a propaganda campaign against him and telegram, allegedly with money trails leading back to facebook and other companies.
>> No. 92155 Anonymous
2nd February 2021
Tuesday 2:29 am
92155 spacer
>there has never been a better time to be alive than now
I would question this for the western world in recent decades. Depending on your criteria*, it's not very hard to see that a not-insignificant number of people in this country still haven't returned to the quality of life they had in 2007. Everyone calls to technology, to global poverty and to global democratisation as signs of progress because the data there is unambiguous. What winds lost in the wayside is that none of that is any consolation if your own life or your own town has gone to shit, especially if nothing and nobody is credibly going to improve it. We may live in a world with more democracies than ever, but most first world democracies have run into crises of legitimacy. It's worth asking why that is.

*And you can have some fun with this. I was assuming a mixture of actual financial position + perceived quality of life, but you can always factor in the hedonic treadmill for extra fun. I suspect that to the human brain, irrational as it is, it feels better to live in China and see your standard of living raise year on year from a low point to a middling one than it does to live in Britain and see it stagnate or moderately decline, despite staying better off in absolute terms.

>> No. 92021 Anonymous
23rd January 2021
Saturday 11:19 am
92021 spacer
Is tackling inequality a pipe dream?

If you're financially secure enough to have capital to invest then you can sit back and watch your wealth increase which, over time, makes the gulf between the haves and the have-nots grow. Either you've got the money to be able to do this or you don't.

Is focusing on inequality a bit of a red herring? It seems like it would be more constructive to instead focus on raising the minimum standard of living for everyone, to ensure they can have a comfortable and secure life.
16 posts and 1 image omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92044 Anonymous
23rd January 2021
Saturday 8:28 pm
92044 spacer
In the case of technology shares the increase in value is meant to be due to recognition of goods and services rendered in the past, present, or future and ultimately this will be the result of the capture of surplus value in the system of capitalism. (i.e. £100 of work has been done or will be done).

When some shares go up other related ones often go down. Look at comparative charts for Intel and AMD to see examples of this. The business ecosystem is complex and although causality is always there, it's not always apparent or easy to see.

In the specific case of the rise in share prices recently, QE has increased the volume of fiat in circulation and a lot of this has gone into buying shares. Ultimately this will have to be repaid by the taxpayer in the form of higher taxes or reduced public services.

The current bubble could be argued as a type of inflation given that everything is getting more expensive. When the bubble bursts a great number of people will find themselves worse off to the same economic magnitude as winners have won (2008 serves as a pretty striking case study in this respect).

In the case of the GME squeeze it's more direct and obviois, as much money as the winners have won last week the losers have lost.
>> No. 92045 Anonymous
23rd January 2021
Saturday 10:04 pm
92045 spacer
It's not a pipe dream, but I think we're going all the wrong ways about it. Or at least, the people who often talk about it have their priorities in all the wrong places.

If I were the king of England and its realms, I would focus on cracking down on parasitic bullshit like interest only mortgages and buy-to-let rent seeking, nationalise the bits of public utilities and infrastructure that it makes sense to do so, and probably create some kind of public work programme. My focus would be on reducing what I can only see as unfair financial pressures those on the lowest rungs of society have to bear, and eliminate the poverty trap.

At the end of the day I think that would probably do a lot more toward levelling the playing field than just keeping on raising the minimum wage or handing out free money (though frankly, if we got the economy sorted out I would still eventually implement some kind of UBI.) Ultimately, if you make it so the peasants have more money, the capital-owning class will just keep raising their rents, prices and tarriffs to gobble it all back up again. What we should do is restrict such opportunism in order that the poor have a lower cost of living, and therefore more disposable income with which they may be encouraged to invest in savings, pensions, other financially sensible options they are currently all too often just unable to do.

I will say, I absolutely hate it when people come out with that line about how you can always make savings or go on r/personalfinance and if you don't you're just stupid and it's your own fault for buying a big telly. I have only ever heard that rhetoric in real life from people who have grown up comfortably wealthy. I'm pretty well off by this stage in my life, but for many years I was dirt poor, and in no small part I attribute my current financial wellbeing to the plain, simple tight-arsed thrift I was forced to learn when I had to support myself on £500 per month. Poor people are often stupid, but more often than that they are trapped in a situation where there are very few winning moves.
>> No. 92046 Anonymous
23rd January 2021
Saturday 10:20 pm
92046 spacer

I'd vote for you, but only if you can summarize that passage as a three word slogan and give me a scapegoat to hate on.
>> No. 92047 Anonymous
23rd January 2021
Saturday 10:32 pm
92047 spacer


You don't vote for a King.

But if you must, it will be "Big, Hard, Britain" and the scapegoat will be pensioners who emigrated defected to the south of Europe.
>> No. 92048 Anonymous
24th January 2021
Sunday 10:34 am
92048 spacer
>It seems like it would be more constructive to instead focus on raising the minimum standard of living for everyone, to ensure they can have a comfortable and secure life.
The problem is that the political economy for this will never exist. To have people care about the standards at the bottom, you need a relatively equal society. Otherwise the political power of those at the bottom approaches zero.

Also, we live in a society where people can always see how other people live. You can't neatly sequester the rich off in their own little bubble where their immense wealth isn't visible to the poor, so the poor are always going to feel like their lives are shit in comparison to what they see elsewhere. Deep down we're monkeys, and monkeys care about relative status, they're going to feel like they're falling behind if their lives get better by 5% a year while everyone (perceived, not actual) else's get better by 25% a year. Let alone the world we actually live in, where their lives have tended to get 5% worse a year while the other side are going to the moon.

>> No. 91877 Anonymous
27th December 2020
Sunday 6:56 pm
91877 spacer
>LIZ TRUSS: Equality should be for everyone - not just for the woke warrior's favoured few

>Growing up in Leeds in the 1980s and 1990s, I was struck by the lip service paid by politicians to equality while, in the real world, children from disadvantaged backgrounds were being let down. At my comprehensive school, we had lessons in racism and sexism, but there was too little effort ensuring everyone had a grasp of maths and English.

>Leeds City Council – run by Labour and where Jeremy Corbyn’s former campaign chief Jon Trickett cut his teeth as leader – opposed the introduction of school league tables and anything else that might help children from poor families do better in class. Leeds was not alone. Many other councils considered high standards in schools to be secondary to their political projects – or even worse, they treated such efforts to raise children’s horizons as elitist. And since then, I have witnessed the spread of misguided, wrong-headed, and ultimately destructive ideas, which, sadly, have become steadily more prevalent in many aspects of British life.

>Take, for example, Labour-run Birmingham City Council. It recently announced plans to give six new streets names such as Diversity Grove, Respect Way and Humanity Close. Do councillors really think that names alone pave the way to real change? Too many people have jumped on this woke bandwagon and lost sight of what most people want: a life in which they can live happily in a secure home, work in a good job and send their children to a decent school. Rather than engage with these priorities, the Left has been swept up by a warped ideology and all its bizarre obsessions. As a result, there is a misguided emphasis on policing our vocabulary so as not to offend, rather than policing our streets. And the woke brigade is angrier about the ‘sins’ of historical figures rather than trying to make a better life for those who live today.

>Their answers are to introduce quotas, diversity agendas and so-called ‘unconscious bias’ training. But these crudely treat people as part of groups rather than as individuals. What’s more, those who do not fit in their cultural box-ticking – for example the white working class – are, in effect, written off. And despite their stated intention to improve society, I am convinced that these dehumanising, disempowering and dysfunctional ideas do nothing in practice to make life fairer. Those behind this pernicious woke culture see everything in terms of societal power structures. To these zombies, truth and morality are merely relative.

>The great irony is that with this moral blindness, the Left has allowed insidious practices to threaten equality. For example, it has failed to defend the single-sex spaces that were won by the hard work of women over generations. It has allowed the spread of antisemitism. It has allowed the appalling grooming of young girls for sex by elder men in towns such as Rotherham. It is vital that things change. The way forward is to ignore the Left’s empty gesture politics and give people more control over their lives. Compared with very many other countries, we can be proud about how far society has developed. Britain is more colour-blind and less sexist than ever. That said, we cannot be complacent. Families, especially those living beyond the South East, face serious hardships. Equality should be for everyone, not just for those groups that the Left deems fashionably worthy of such attention.

>What we don’t need is the type of patronising feminism symbolised by Harriet Harman’s notorious ‘pink bus’, which was driven around the country during the 2015 General Election campaign. It often repelled the female voters it was meant to woo. Let us not listen to a party that claims to champion women but which has never elected a female leader. The reason the Tory Party has had two female leaders and now has the largest ever number of people from ethnic-minority backgrounds in Cabinet is not because of positive discrimination, but down to positive empowerment.

>This Government was elected to level up the country – to fix the scourge of geographic inequality and ensure equal opportunity for all. This will not be achieved through identity politics, virtue-signalling or any other kind of right-on posturing. It can only be done if politicians are in touch with the real issues people face in their daily lives. This is a task already under way in government. The Treasury has made it crystal clear that it will assess all future big spending projects in order to guarantee that Ministers spread investment across Britain as part of our policy to level up the whole country.
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.
21 posts and 1 image omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 92019 Anonymous
22nd January 2021
Friday 9:17 am
92019 spacer
>>91879 here again.

They're having a field day with this:

>The three wise monkeys have been a cultural trope throughout the world for centuries as a symbol of seeing, hearing and speaking no evil. Academics at the University of York have decided that they are, in fact, an oppressive racial stereotype, and pulled an image of the animals from their website to avoid offence.

>Organisers of a forthcoming art history conference apologised for using the picture in their call for submissions. “Upon reflection, we strongly believe that our first poster is not appropriate as its iconology promulgates a longstanding visual legacy of oppression and exploits racist stereotypes,” they wrote. “We bring this to your attention, so that we may be held accountable for our actions and, in our privileges, do and be better.”

>A spokeswoman for the University of York said that the organisers of the online conference, entitled Sensorial Fixations: Orality, Aurality, Opticality and Hapticity, were worried about a possible insult to ethnic minorities.

>> No. 92020 Anonymous
22nd January 2021
Friday 9:25 am
92020 spacer
>The woke left will naturally see this and double down ... The materialist left will remain a fringe minority

I think you should read this and see why your 'woke'/'materialist' dichotomy is bullshit.

>> No. 92057 Anonymous
24th January 2021
Sunday 5:30 pm
92057 spacer

Otherlad here. I sympathise with the author and find it disappointing that they experienced that at a political gathering describing themselves as the "left". I also broadly agree with their historical point about miners and LGBT people, and would of course like to see more of that kind of solidarity.

I do also think, though, that the hostility and ridicule they experienced is precisely the result of the divide-and-rule politics at play that >>92020 describes. I think the left has the far more difficult task in bringing together and adequately representing a far more diverse range of interests than the right, which are generally more organised consolidations of power -- not perfect, but surely from a narrower range of backgrounds and interests.

By necessity, it's also the working class that should make up the bulk of the movement in terms of sheer numbers. There's a fine balance between extending an olive branch to people who have already been deliberately conditioned to casual homophobia/transphobia/racism and accepting any level of prejudice against minorities.

Maybe the historical example is apt, as they clearly found a way to get past typical socially conservative rhetoric and see it as a matter of basic human rights, in the same way that LGBT people fully threw themselves behind the concrete material issues that plague the majority of the British population.

As a sidenote: I have been guilty of feeling frustrated with an ineffectual left, and it seems like this sentiment has been with us at least since the 1980s when Alexei Sayle was taking the piss out of people who "knit their own yoghurt". It's tempting to think that trans and LGBT groups are diverting people from material concerns in this way, but I've been kept grounded by actually having LGBT friends from both working and middle class backgrounds. Generally, they don't dismiss my concerns as long as I articulate them well and I don't dismiss theirs.

I also believe that our current economic system is one that will award performative and shallowleftism (which I think is what >>92020 really means by "wokeness") and punish any genuine solidarity that threatens to bring in larger crowds. It's why today we can read the Guardian but not the Daily Herald.

Similar dynamics occur around racial politics, too, by the way; American figures like MLK are remembered for their flowery speeches on issues which don't offend corporate or free market sensibilities, but they're not remembered for their solidarity with striking union workers.
>> No. 92058 Anonymous
24th January 2021
Sunday 5:31 pm
92058 spacer

Brian won't let me delete the post, but the two instances of >>92020 in there were actually meant to be >>91893.
>> No. 92059 Anonymous
24th January 2021
Sunday 10:57 pm
92059 spacer

Couldn't agree more.

The trouble is it's rare to see examples of real solidarity from those kinds of performative leftists, and it's hard not to come to the conclusion that they're either simple grifters making a bit of money and attention while it's fashionable, or they are intentional wreckers knowingly distorting the shape of leftist discourse.

Either way, it's pretty much inarguable, after everything that's happened over the last for or five years, that all of it is a massive own-goal for lefties and leaves us wide open for the right to score easy, cheap points by pointing at whatever the latest Twitter fad is and going "Look what those mad lefty snowflakes are up to now eh?! They're after female space marines now! Where will it end!"

>> No. 90480 Anonymous
6th September 2020
Sunday 1:59 am
90480 This man is going to be the next President and it's going to be awesome
TRUMP 2020
292 posts and 57 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 91911 Anonymous
8th January 2021
Friday 12:39 am
91911 spacer
He has just posted a video, conceding.
>> No. 91912 Anonymous
8th January 2021
Friday 12:45 am
91912 spacer
The mentalists are claiming it is a deepfake, and that the deep state has won.
>> No. 91913 Anonymous
8th January 2021
Friday 12:48 am
91913 spacer
His lawyer, not the mad mayor one, a proper one, just told him he could get nicked if he leans in on an attempted coup.
>> No. 91914 Anonymous
8th January 2021
Friday 10:13 am
91914 spacer
Alright, now it's over can we get a /yank/ meta-board alongside /*/ and /sfw/ so I never have to think about Seppos again.
>> No. 91915 Anonymous
8th January 2021
Friday 2:29 pm
91915 spacer

I think it's called /zoo/, if that still exists. I'd vote that all Yank business go in there anyhow.

>> No. 84895 Anonymous
9th February 2019
Saturday 8:13 am
84895 spacer
Jimmy Saville: My new Brexit party stands ready to defend democracy


'Thousands of Tory party members' to defect to Jimmy Saville's Brexit Party as it gets official approval


Rebel Labour MPs set to quit party and form centre group

862 posts and 113 images omitted. Expand all images.
>> No. 91875 Anonymous
25th December 2020
Friday 9:07 pm
91875 spacer
Doubt you can even fly what with corona restrictions. Shhame - Middle east would be nice this time of year.
>> No. 91876 Anonymous
26th December 2020
Saturday 11:35 am
91876 spacer
Just had a mate piss off to Dubai for a couple weeks. Said no one seemed to give a shit at the airports.

Another mate is fucking off to Mexico tomorrow.
>> No. 91907 Anonymous
4th January 2021
Monday 7:41 pm
91907 spacer

I've been thinking a lot about Sphere Starmer, so I present Mitt Rombus.
>> No. 91908 Anonymous
4th January 2021
Monday 7:43 pm
91908 spacer
Meant to go in the American thread. Fuck's sake.
>> No. 91909 Anonymous
4th January 2021
Monday 7:57 pm
91909 spacer

Don't blame them, there are some bargains about at the momeny. Got a cracking deal on New York for the end of the year.

Delete Post []
Previous[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]