The new Cold War(s)

[TenEightyOne]

Why is there no issue with using "Russia" and not "Russian Nationalists"....

Because they're not the same thing. If you know anything about the make-up of Russia and its history (including the years of the Soviet Union) then you'll already know the answer.

As a very loose parallel; think of the difference between British Nationalists and the British. They're not the same thing. Then think of Cornish secessionists, Welsh nationalists, Scottish nationalists and the true face of the UK, The First Nation of Yorkshire (huzzah). It's not a direct parallel but it gives you an idea of why some generalisations are just useless in some contexts.

 

[KSaiyu]

Well consistency would be an idea, however with Russia and the West it is arguably a government to government issue at its core.

And the leader of the Labour party wouldn't be representative of a governmental party...?

Because they're not the same thing. If you know anything about the make-up of Russia and its history (including the years of the Soviet Union) then you'll already know the answer.

As a very loose parallel; think of the difference between British Nationalists and the British. They're not the same thing. Then think of Cornish secessionists, Welsh nationalists, Scottish nationalists and the true face of the UK, The First Nation of Yorkshire (huzzah). It's not a direct parallel but it gives you an idea of why some generalisations are just useless in some contexts

The fact is we generalise - people only have a problem when we do it negatively. Would there be an exception if I said Islam is charitable? This is based on statistics and their doctrine, but obviously it doesn't mean every Muslim is charitable.

 

[Scaff]

The fact is we generalise - people only have a problem when we do it negatively. Would there be an exception if I said Islam is charitable? This is based on statistics and their doctrine, but obviously it doesn't mean every Muslim is charitable.

Yes there would from me, as while its one of the central pillars of Islam its quite clear that not every Muslim is charitable.

Your once again making assumptions.

And the leader of the Labour party wouldn't be representative of a governmental party...?

And? Are you actually trying to say that Labour in the UK define the Left in its entirety?

 

[squadops]

Well this is what Moses Miliband says, I'm not sure it's a 'thought police' sort of thing because he's not explaining a criminal charge or penalty.

We are going to make sure it is marked on people's records, with the police to make sure they root out Islamophobia as a hate crime.

So something like how in the U.S. we have a sex criminal registry, this makes it very hard for people on the list to find housing, jobs, etc. He'd have to either propose labels for each specific type of hater, or live with a catch all label hate criminal.

We are going to change the law so we make it absolutely clear of [sic] our abhorrence of hate crime and Islamophobia. It will be the first time that the police will record Islamophobic attacks right across the country.

He's making a distinction between the two which is odd, again I can only really relate this to procedures in the U.S.(as that's what I know), we add a 'hate crime' tag to other crimes committed to stiffen sentences, we also use the label 'terrorist' in the same way. Doesn't the U.K. already have hate crime laws on the books?

It looks like political trickery to me, any hate is hate in the eyes of hate crime law, does there need to be a list?

 

[Scaff]

Well this is what Moses Miliband says, I'm not sure it's a 'thought police' sort of thing because he's not explaining a criminal charge or penalty.


So something like how in the U.S. we have a sex criminal registry, this makes it very hard for people on the list to find housing, jobs, etc. He'd have to either propose labels for each specific type of hater, or live with a catch all label hate criminal.


He's making a distinction between the two which is odd, again I can only really relate this to procedures in the U.S.(as that's what I know), we add a 'hate crime' tag to other crimes committed to stiffen sentences, we also use the label 'terrorist' in the same way. Doesn't the U.K. already have hate crime laws on the books?

It looks like political trickery to me, any hate is hate in the eyes of hate crime law, does there need to be a list?

Its principally political posturing (at an election so no surprise) and yes we have laws that are more than enough to do the job.

I quite frankly oppose the idea of it 100%, but as I'm left of centre and in the UK according to @KSaiyu I can be lumped into one nice big homogeneous group with the whole left, from rabid communists to slightly left leaning libertarians such as myself.

As such I'm quite clearly wrong and so I must go out and cheer for laws that could restrict free speech on religious grounds (which would be an absurd claim to level at myself).

 

[KSaiyu]

What....where did I say that.

As if I'd expect anyone to live up to a list of this, this and this and only be defined by their political leanings.

 

[Scaff]

What....where did I say that.

As if I'd expect anyone to live up to a list of this, this and this and only be defined by their political leanings.

I fall into your broad category of "the left" that you seem to be hell bent on putting into one Homogeneous group, so its simply a logical extention of that. After all you did argue that its not possiable to change that " because you can't break down Islam into Islamists, nor "the Left" into extreme Left, Labour only or mainstream Left."

What else am I supposed to think?

Would you be OK if I grouped you with Jean-Marie Le Penn's Holocaust denial simply by refusing to break the right into accurate categories? Which is exactly what your doing by grouping me in with people who covered up abuse, what's concerning is that you can't even see it.

 

[KSaiyu]

No I wouldn't, because there's a clear delineation between extreme right and right/libertarianism. It's a lot more muddy with the British Left.

I'd say you, the individual are a part of the British Left. Does that mean you agree with everything they do? No. But you can't deny the actions and attitudes of the British Left as an establishment.

 

[Scaff]

No I wouldn't, because there's a clear delineation between extreme right and right/libertarianism. It's a lot more muddy with the British Left.

I'd say you, the individual are a part of the British Left. Does that mean you agree with everything they do? No. But you can't deny the actions and attitudes of the British Left as an establishment.

No I wouldn't, because there's a clear delineation between extreme left and left/libertarianism. It's a lot more muddy with the British Right.

I'd say you, the individual are a part of the British Right. Does that mean you agree with everything they do? No. But you can't deny the actions and attitudes of the British Right as an establishment.


Still makes no 🤬 sense at all.

Quite clear divides exist on both the right and the left between the extreme elements, the mainstream and the moderate; I don't want to impose communism or re-nationalise anything anymore than I think you want to get rid of everyone whose family has not been here since the Normans or isn't white. That you are utterly unable to see that is quite frankly amazing and will I assure you be a significant bar to you being able to be taken seriously in any discussion regarding it. Its an absurd double standard.

 

[KSaiyu]

That's disappointing.

I have problems with the British Right. I'm not sure what the point is?? UKIP is an extreme. Same as Greens. Tories are more centre, as are Labour.

 

[Scaff]

That's disappointing.

That's the reality of the situation, as long as you are unable to see that some very clear differences exist in this regard then its going to be a serious hit to your credibility.

I have problems with the British Right. I'm not sure what the point is?? UKIP is an extreme. Same as Greens. Tories are more centre, as are Labour.

I have issues with the Socialist Workers party, I have issues with the Greens I have issues with extreme trade unions; they are part of the Left, but certainly don't define it and the distinction between that and even the Labour party are still quite clear.

 

[KSaiyu]

That's the reality of the situation, as long as you are unable to see that some very clear differences exist in this regard then its going to be a serious hit to your credibility.

I have issues with the Socialist Workers party, I have issues with the Greens I have issues with extreme trade unions; they are part of the Left, but certainly don't define it and the distinction between that and even the Labour party are still quite clear.

No it's not a hit to my credibility. You want me to separate the British Left and Islam yet are providing no justification for doing so. Show me something to back up what you want.

If Miliband went all Theresa May and called for anti Muslim attacks to be recorded separately, (something I think is monumentally stupid - what about the anti Christian attacks?) then maybe you could try and disentangle the mess the British Left find themselves in. As it stands now, I don't think you can but you are welcome to try.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

No it's not a hit to my credibility.

You don't get to determine your own credibility.

And yes, your inability to distinguish between different political groups totally destroys any credibility you might have had.

 

[KSaiyu]

You don't get to determine your own credibility.

And yes, your inability to distinguish between different political groups totally destroys any credibility you might have had.

Rather have reduced credibility than set feminism back 100 years

 

[Scaff]

No it's not a hit to my credibility.

Not your choice.

You want me to separate the British Left and Islam yet are providing no justification for doing so. Show me something to back up what you want.

I've already shown you a massive amount of justification for doing so, that you are unable to see that says far more about your biases.

If Miliband went all Theresa May and called for anti Muslim attacks to be recorded separately, (something I think is monumentally stupid - what about the anti Christian attacks?) then maybe you could try and disentangle the mess the British Left find themselves in. As it stands now, I don't think you can but you are welcome to try.

So how much different is that to what Labour called for? I fall to see how this puts all of the Left into a singular blob.

Rather have reduced credibility than set feminism back 100 years

Would you like a reminder of the UKIP comments on women?

I can't after all see how they differ from any other part of the right.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Rather have reduced credibility than set feminism back 100 years

It's only the seating, the Mail would have it that there was gender "segregation". Labour politicians normally refuse to attend men-only conventions.

It's interesting that the other night I was in the only club that I've ever been in where women are only allowed in one of the bars. That was the Conservative Club.

Do you think that Labour "set feminism back 100 years" on the basis of attending an event with a community where male/female seating is the norm? Should they be allowed to interact with synagogues, I wonder?

 

[niky]

Well consistency would be an idea, however with Russia and the West it is arguably a government to government issue at its core.

The time when any conflict between Russia or China and the West could be ascribed to ideological differences rather than a simple struggle for political and economic power has long since passed.

 

[LeMansAid]

Why is there no issue with using "Russia" and not "Russian Nationalists"....

Fashion and hypocrisy.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I have problems with the British Right. I'm not sure what the point is?? UKIP is an extreme. Same as Greens. Tories are more centre, as are Labour.

So you clearly recognise that different groups hold different views within the same branch of the political spectrum, then. So why do you only do it for the political right? You make the distinction for the right-leaning parties, but generalise anyone who has leftist views.

Why do you think I quoted Auden? It wasn't to introduce some intellectual lah-dee-dah into the conversation - it was because his poetry was so critical of the very attitude you espouse: absolute, unquestioning allegiance to the ideology, and the conscious decision to sacrifice morality in the name of it.

 

[Scaff]

Fashion and hypocrisy.

You might have a point if that question had not been answered, but it was.

 

[KSaiyu]

I've already shown you a massive amount of justification for doing so, that you are unable to see that says far more about your biases.

No you haven't. Refute the claims that they colluded in covering up Muslim grooming gangs and Trojan Horse, and that Labour's leader wants to criminalise "Islamophobia" whilst Labour's biggest donor is supporting Rahman.

Then you will have shown me a "massive amount of justification".

So how much different is that to what Labour called for? I fall to see how this puts all of the Left into a singular blob.

OK this is very scary that you can't make the distinction.

EDIT: Funny how this is going like my other thread....

 

[Beeblebrox237]

EDIT: Funny how this is going like my other thread....

Funny how you continue to make ridiculous claims, comparisons, and generalisations while blatantly ignoring evidence and logic...

 

[Scaff]

No you haven't. Refute the claims that they colluded in covering up Muslim grooming gangs and Trojan Horse, and that Labour's leader wants to criminalise "Islamophobia" whilst Labour's biggest donor is supporting Rahman.

Then you will have shown me a "massive amount of justification".

Who are "they"?

The whole of the left or a small part of a Labour run council?

You cite Miliband as wanting to Criminalize "Islamophobia" while showing that the Tories want to do effectively the same thing?

You also forget that while Labour's biggest donor may support a criminal, that donor and the Labour party do not see eye to eye on a lot of things, you also forget that Labour were the main target of Rahman and they were the ones who condemned him and fought directly against him.

Your also still conflating the Labour party with the whole of "The Left".

However you are the one making the claim that "The Left" is a single entity, as such the burden of proof for that is on you.

You claim that "clear delineation between extreme right and right/libertarianism" exists, but not for the Left ("it's a lot more muddy" - which acknowledges that differences exist but you simply don't care to distinguish them), so show it.

Show my the massive overlap between Antifa UK and the Labour Party, I'm in particular interested in how you will manage the key policy of direct physical confrontation they have, after all to not be able to would show a clear delineation.

What about the British Communist Parties manifesto policy of nationalising every part of the UK and the total removal of the Capitalist system, as unless the Labour party are doing the same that would be a clear delineation?

Violent street confrontations, the removal of the Capitalist system, nationalization of every aspect of the UK and the establishment of a Communist society. These are all key goals of the far left, please show a match to everyone of those for the Labour party, because without that they seem to be rather clear delineations.

OK this is very scary that you can't make the distinction.

What? You are the one unable to see distinct differences within both the right and left of politics.

EDIT: Funny how this is going like my other thread....

That's what happens when you assume your view is automatically correct and use that as a jumping off point for any discussion.

 

[KSaiyu]

Who are "they"?

Labour, et al.

What? You are the one unable to see distinct differences within both the right and left of politics.

I'm not sure if you seriously need an example of how they are different or...?

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm not sure if you seriously need an example of how they are different or...?

I think you might, you talk about "The Left" and "The Right" as if each is neatly compartmentisable with no cross over or sub-groups. To me that speaks of some inexperience (once again) and suggests that you continue to bite off more than you can chew.

 

[KSaiyu]

Read what I was quoting..

 

[Scaff]

Labour, et al.

So you refuse to put any distinction in place within "The Left"........

I'm not sure if you seriously need an example of how they are different or...?

......but you claim you're "able to see distinct differences within both the right and left of politics.", to the degree that you're asking if I need examples?

Well that's either a massive contradiction or you're deliberately being obtuse*.

Read what I was quoting..

We are, and you're contradicting yourself.

In a single post above you've both lumped "The Left" together but then said that asked if I needed an example of the "distinct differences within both the right and left of politics"


Now please address the following:

Show me the massive overlap between Antifa UK and the Labour Party, I'm in particular interested in how you will manage the key policy of direct physical confrontation they have, after all to not be able to would show a clear delineation.

What about the British Communist Parties manifesto policy of nationalising every part of the UK and the total removal of the Capitalist system, as unless the Labour party are doing the same that would be a clear delineation?

Violent street confrontations, the removal of the Capitalist system, nationalization of every aspect of the UK and the establishment of a Communist society. These are all key goals of the far left, please show a match to everyone of those for the Labour party, because without that it seem to be some rather clear delineations.


*Or did you just misread it? That would be ironic.

 

[huskeR32]

Funny how this is going like my other thread....

"Unsurprising" is probably the word I'd use. But I suppose there's some humor in it too.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Funny how this is going like my other thread....

How were you expecting it to go? That we would all do an about face and agree with you unconditionally?

 

[KSaiyu]

You do realise it is only the liberals here arguing the unarguable right? Tell me you guys see that at least....

It's only the seating, the Mail would have it that there was gender "segregation". Labour politicians normally refuse to attend men-only conventions.

It's interesting that the other night I was in the only club that I've ever been in where women are only allowed in one of the bars. That was the Conservative Club.

Do you think that Labour "set feminism back 100 years" on the basis of attending an event with a community where male/female seating is the norm? Should they be allowed to interact with synagogues, I wonder?

This used to be a cultural norm. I'm thinking of convincing the British Left to let it comeback. What do you say, let's start with the Labour tour bus?