| The world is fooked 08:53 - Jun 17 with 19095 views | Herbivore |
Being realistic about it, Boris is going to be our next PM. The Tory party see him as, somehow, being someone who can win elections against the Labour party and have decided that this is clearly more important than resolving Brexit in a way that doesn’t destroy the country and indeed more important than what is best for the country in general. Concerns about his lack of competence and integrity have been pushed aside in the interests of preserving the Conservative Party and their grip on power. Standard, but depressing nonetheless.
More broadly, though, is there anything more indicative of how badly we’re fooked as a society than Boris and Trump coming to power? Neither man is remotely capable of the job they have been tasked with, both are where they are solely on the back of white male privilege and nothing more. They are the definition of the triumph of elitism over meritocracy.
Let’s start with Trump. The man is a thick bigot, the most fragile egotist imaginable. The Trump blimp triggered him so badly precisely because it was so accurate. He pitches himself as a successful businessman who knows how to get deals done, someone who is not part of the establishment and who has been a huge success. Bigly successful. And yet, if he’d simply put the vast wealth he inherited from his father into a savings account he would be wealthier than he is now. He has failed as a businessman many times over and any mitigating success has come solely because his vast inherited wealth has enabled him to try and try again. His one selling point is based on smoke and mirrors.
He has managed to ride a wave of mainly white working-class discontent through carefully managed populist rhetoric that is as dangerous as it is vacuous. His litany of misdemeanours would make him unemployable if he came from any other background, yet pure wealth and privilege has enabled him to bankroll his way to power. If his followers really feel that white males are being marginalised by liberalism, they need only look at the fact that Trump is in power as proof that this is not remotely the case.
As for Boris, the man is simply a nasty, power-hungry incompetent. Born to wealth and privilege, from very early on his character was marked by seeking power at all costs. Even at Eton and Oxford he was more concerned with gaining power and notoriety than actually excelling as a student, and he was willing to do whatever was needed to get there. Sounds familiar? As a journalist he was sacked for falsifying a quote, a journalistic offence so egregious that it would usually spell the end of a career. Yet Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson has been given chance after chance, purely because of his name and privilege rather than his talent.
As an MP he has held one cabinet position and was an abject failure. Not only did he fail to achieve anything at all of note, numerous reports suggest that he was simply unfit for the role; frequently he was not well-briefed, not interested in detail, and seemingly uninterested when attending important meetings. That’s without even considering that he endangered the life of a UK citizen through his own lazy carelessness when talking about why she was in Iran. He still refuses to take any responsibility for that, despite it once again being such an horrendous error that it would cost most people their job, let alone somehow pave the way for them to hold an even more responsible job. All this before we even consider the overt racist remarks, the dog-whistling, the general question marks over his poor character and total lack of any principles (writing two articles backing both remain and leave, anyone?).
Sorry for the lengthy rant, but it really boils my piss that we have these snake oil salesman in positions of power. They are where they are not because of any talent they have, not because they are the best men for the job, not because they have a positive vision for their countries. They are where they are because of wealth and privilege, nothing more. Their sole focus in on maintaining their privilege and on preserving a system that rewards such privilege.
The worst of it is that they are doing so by exploiting unrest amongst the working classes, unrest caused by the kind of social and economic inequalities that they and their cronies are responsible for. And they know this, yet they point the finger at other disadvantaged groups and lay the blame at their door. It’s easy to do, it plays on a base instinct in people to blame the ‘other’ rather than someone that looks like them and speaks their language (in more ways than one). They are backed by the wealthy and powerful in the media who share their overriding agenda to preserve the dominance of wealthy elites, and this simply makes the power train an irresistible force with no immovable object available at our disposal to oppose it.
All thoroughly depressing, really. |  |
| |  |
| The world is fooked on 11:38 - Jun 17 with 5293 views | Guthrum |
| The world is fooked on 11:19 - Jun 17 by Herbivore |
I would see the far left as being radical rather than progressive. I'd see the centre and left of centre as being progressive. The far left would want to see an overthrow of the capitalist system or, at the very least, making such a radical overhaul of it as to render it unrecognisable.
Would you not see things like mainstream politicians vying to run the country talking about shutting down parliament to force through policy as being somewhat autocratic? Or Trump using presidential powers to force through policies he knows won't get through the two houses? |
It's only really Raab whose saying that. And nobody beyond the narrowest fringes (in the UK, at least) is proposing to lock up union leaders or use violence to disperse peaceful protests. As for the USA, that is the way the system works over there - also it can be challenged both in Congress and through the courts. Plus Trump has used about the same number of Executive Orders as Obama did in his first three years, with fewer vetoes.
To preach an ovethrow of capitalism, you need a system to replace it. That doesn't exist (state communism is pretty much dead and not coming back, fatally tainted by the Soviet experience). A radical overhaul of capitalism is still capitalism. It's mostly the unregulated rapaciousness and unequal distribution of its benefits to which people - including Marx and Engels - object anyway, not the basic principles of manufacture, commerce and trade. |  |
| |
| The world is fooked on 11:53 - Jun 17 with 5270 views | WeWereZombies |
| The world is fooked on 11:38 - Jun 17 by Guthrum |
It's only really Raab whose saying that. And nobody beyond the narrowest fringes (in the UK, at least) is proposing to lock up union leaders or use violence to disperse peaceful protests. As for the USA, that is the way the system works over there - also it can be challenged both in Congress and through the courts. Plus Trump has used about the same number of Executive Orders as Obama did in his first three years, with fewer vetoes.
To preach an ovethrow of capitalism, you need a system to replace it. That doesn't exist (state communism is pretty much dead and not coming back, fatally tainted by the Soviet experience). A radical overhaul of capitalism is still capitalism. It's mostly the unregulated rapaciousness and unequal distribution of its benefits to which people - including Marx and Engels - object anyway, not the basic principles of manufacture, commerce and trade. |
I do not follow George Monbiot much but from his appearance on 'Frankie Boyle's New World Order' he does seem to want a fundamental change in the principles of manufacture, commerce and trade. And is part of a significant Worldwide movement protesting for that. Environmental and climate change activism (there are two strands here and they occasionally pull in different directions, add in traditional conservation groups and those directions can be totally at odds when subjects like wind power are brought up) puts conditions for either human life or all life on Earth at the top of the agenda and any social benefits such as fairer distribution are secondary. If capitalism has a role to play it as a crude tactic and not as the overriding strategy it seems. |  |
| |
| The world is fooked on 11:58 - Jun 17 with 5258 views | SouthBucksBlue |
| The world is fooked on 09:29 - Jun 17 by Herbivore |
I think we fundamentally disagree on this. Any meaningful, indeed radical, change will need to happen either globally or within a large power block to have any chance of being sustainable. We are better off within than without. |
Your rational is simplistic, uncomplicated, obvious and correct.
The global challenges of the modern world e.g. preserving our environment, cyber security, preventing the abuse of social media, poverty and having a meaningful influence on the conduct of the superpowers (primarily USA, China and Russia) cannot be addressed by a single small sovereign nation. |  | | |
| The world is fooked on 12:03 - Jun 17 with 5244 views | Guthrum |
| The world is fooked on 11:38 - Jun 17 by WeWereZombies |
You do not think that pejorative terms for the left have an older lineage then? I am thinking of the Spanish word 'izquierdo' being taken from Basque as a way of alluding to a culture that the ruling class there wanted to subjugate and a political direction they were threatened by being elided into a simple word for the direction 'left'. So in everyday language the belief that contradiction of monarchy and church was reinforced every time you showed someone the way. See also left handers and now discarded attempts to correct this trait. |
The term in mainstream political use strictly originated with seating arrangements in the Estates General during the last decade of the 18th century. How old is the use of that term in Spanish politics (i.e. does it antedate the French Revolutionary term, or derive from it)? A quick search doesn't reveal any party name incorporating that word earlier than the 1880s. A quick reading of the etymology suggests thet the term was used to differentiate it from the more loaded word "sinistra".
Reactionaries within the British political system were insultingly nicknamed after a bunch of notorious Irish robbers back in the 17th century - and the name stuck (Tories). [Post edited 17 Jun 2019 12:04]
| |
| |
| The world is fooked on 12:09 - Jun 17 with 5234 views | ROKERITE |
| The world is fooked on 11:58 - Jun 17 by SouthBucksBlue |
Your rational is simplistic, uncomplicated, obvious and correct.
The global challenges of the modern world e.g. preserving our environment, cyber security, preventing the abuse of social media, poverty and having a meaningful influence on the conduct of the superpowers (primarily USA, China and Russia) cannot be addressed by a single small sovereign nation. |
I am proud to be a citizen of a small, sovereign nation. I want to remain a citizen of a small, sovereign nation. I'm saddened by how many neo-imperialists there are though Guy Verhofstadt would be delighted. The E.U. is a threat not a promise. | | | |
| The world is fooked on 12:13 - Jun 17 with 5216 views | flimflam |
So your not a Boris fan then I take it? |  |
| All men and women are created, by the, you know the, you know the thing. |
| |
| The world is fooked on 12:23 - Jun 17 with 5194 views | GeoffSentence |
| The world is fooked on 12:09 - Jun 17 by ROKERITE |
I am proud to be a citizen of a small, sovereign nation. I want to remain a citizen of a small, sovereign nation. I'm saddened by how many neo-imperialists there are though Guy Verhofstadt would be delighted. The E.U. is a threat not a promise. |
You are very interesting from a Brexit point of view. Most Brexiteers that I have met look backwards fondly towards empire. You are unique in my experience, of advocating Brexit in opposition to imperialism. |  |
| |
| The world is fooked on 12:29 - Jun 17 with 5186 views | Guthrum |
| The world is fooked on 11:53 - Jun 17 by WeWereZombies |
I do not follow George Monbiot much but from his appearance on 'Frankie Boyle's New World Order' he does seem to want a fundamental change in the principles of manufacture, commerce and trade. And is part of a significant Worldwide movement protesting for that. Environmental and climate change activism (there are two strands here and they occasionally pull in different directions, add in traditional conservation groups and those directions can be totally at odds when subjects like wind power are brought up) puts conditions for either human life or all life on Earth at the top of the agenda and any social benefits such as fairer distribution are secondary. If capitalism has a role to play it as a crude tactic and not as the overriding strategy it seems. |
Capitalism was never really more than just a mechanism, the use of borrowing to finance business (something which had been going on since the Middle Ages). Poor regulation at times of rapid change allowed individuals and families to generate vast personal fortunes, usually through monopolistic behaviour. Causing damage to the environment in the process.
I'm not sure Monbiot wants to eradicate all trade and industry, so much as to moderate its behaviour significantly. Marx certainly followed that pattern. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The world is fooked on 12:44 - Jun 17 with 5163 views | Herbivore |
| The world is fooked on 11:38 - Jun 17 by Guthrum |
It's only really Raab whose saying that. And nobody beyond the narrowest fringes (in the UK, at least) is proposing to lock up union leaders or use violence to disperse peaceful protests. As for the USA, that is the way the system works over there - also it can be challenged both in Congress and through the courts. Plus Trump has used about the same number of Executive Orders as Obama did in his first three years, with fewer vetoes.
To preach an ovethrow of capitalism, you need a system to replace it. That doesn't exist (state communism is pretty much dead and not coming back, fatally tainted by the Soviet experience). A radical overhaul of capitalism is still capitalism. It's mostly the unregulated rapaciousness and unequal distribution of its benefits to which people - including Marx and Engels - object anyway, not the basic principles of manufacture, commerce and trade. |
McVey was also saying it. That's around 20% of the leadership candidates advocating to shut down parliament to force through a policy. I see that as autocratic and for me it's symptomatic of how we have shifted to the right that suggestions like this aren't even shocking and are even excused in some quarters.
How many times did Obama declare a national emergency to force things through? I'm aware all presidents use their powers to make executive orders but Trump declaring national emergencies isn't something I remember Obama doing. | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 12:47 - Jun 17 with 5157 views | SouthBucksBlue |
I think it's fair to say that unlike in the USA where the bigoted, insular and poorly educated actually voted for Trump, most of us would not vote for Boris as P.M. It is ridiculous therefore that he probably will end up as P.M.
The fundamental problem for the U.K. (more specifically England) is that our Parliamentary system is no longer fit for purpose and is in desperate need of reform and modernisation. [Post edited 17 Jun 2019 12:50]
| | | |
| The world is fooked on 12:49 - Jun 17 with 5155 views | SouthBucksBlue |
| The world is fooked on 12:09 - Jun 17 by ROKERITE |
I am proud to be a citizen of a small, sovereign nation. I want to remain a citizen of a small, sovereign nation. I'm saddened by how many neo-imperialists there are though Guy Verhofstadt would be delighted. The E.U. is a threat not a promise. |
"I am proud to be a citizen of a small, sovereign nation. I want to remain a citizen of a small, sovereign nation"
Why? | | | |
| The world is fooked on 13:16 - Jun 17 with 5111 views | No9 |
| The world is fooked on 09:49 - Jun 17 by pickles110564 |
EU letting us down once again, roll on Boris and Nigel. |
How do you come to that conclusion?
Two rich men making decisions on other people lives by telling lies? That is a strange position to take on a serious matter | | | |
| The world is fooked on 13:19 - Jun 17 with 5099 views | BobbyDazzler |
Hurry up & get brexit papers signed ,enoughs enough just leave |  | | |
| The world is fooked on 13:20 - Jun 17 with 5097 views | Herbivore |
| The world is fooked on 13:19 - Jun 17 by BobbyDazzler |
Hurry up & get brexit papers signed ,enoughs enough just leave |
Anything to add to the actual debate, friend? | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 13:35 - Jun 17 with 5075 views | cbower |
No need to apologise for being spot on Herbs. The inability of people to see through Boris Johnson is frustrating. Mumbling obfuscation and a crazy hairdo is seemingly all that is required in our depressingly shallow version of the modern society. Your views on the self preservation of the Tory Party and their love of Boris could well have been written by...……...well......me! |  |
| |
| The world is fooked on 14:26 - Jun 17 with 5032 views | caught-in-limbo |
| The world is fooked on 10:37 - Jun 17 by Guthrum |
Chaos comes from sheer incompetence or blind self-interest as often as any deliberate plan*. And a National Government, or at least a cross-party comission, is what ought to have been thrown at the Brexit problem in the first place. Certainly after 2017, when the Conservatives had thrown away their slim majority (again through incompetence).
* It's fairly easy to create, yes, but much more difficult to manage and steer. It's an ignorant fool who deliberately courts it. History is littered with people who tried, then got crushed as it ran out of control. |
One of the characteristics of chaos is that it is chaotic. If you can manage or steer it, then by definition you have some control over things - so it's not chaos any more. I get your point though.
Chaos is usually a precursor to previously unwanted change. If chaos is introduced prior to change, people then opt for the change instead of the chaos.
Let's see where this chaos leads us. |  |
| |
| The world is fooked on 14:34 - Jun 17 with 5017 views | caught-in-limbo |
| The world is fooked on 11:38 - Jun 17 by WeWereZombies |
You do not think that pejorative terms for the left have an older lineage then? I am thinking of the Spanish word 'izquierdo' being taken from Basque as a way of alluding to a culture that the ruling class there wanted to subjugate and a political direction they were threatened by being elided into a simple word for the direction 'left'. So in everyday language the belief that contradiction of monarchy and church was reinforced every time you showed someone the way. See also left handers and now discarded attempts to correct this trait. |
Have an uppie for accurate etymology of Euskarazko hitzak. | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 15:09 - Jun 17 with 4983 views | Darth_Koont |
| The world is fooked on 10:49 - Jun 17 by Herbivore |
I wouldn't describe any of it as far left. Look at a Labour's actual manifesto and policy proposals and its social democracy, to the left of centre yes but for me it's a symptom of how far right the country has moved that social democracy is now seem as being of the extreme left. If we're also lumping environmentalism in as an example of far left thinking then we're really in trouble. |
Well said. |  |
| |
| The world is fooked on 15:13 - Jun 17 with 4976 views | Darth_Koont |
| The world is fooked on 11:38 - Jun 17 by Guthrum |
It's only really Raab whose saying that. And nobody beyond the narrowest fringes (in the UK, at least) is proposing to lock up union leaders or use violence to disperse peaceful protests. As for the USA, that is the way the system works over there - also it can be challenged both in Congress and through the courts. Plus Trump has used about the same number of Executive Orders as Obama did in his first three years, with fewer vetoes.
To preach an ovethrow of capitalism, you need a system to replace it. That doesn't exist (state communism is pretty much dead and not coming back, fatally tainted by the Soviet experience). A radical overhaul of capitalism is still capitalism. It's mostly the unregulated rapaciousness and unequal distribution of its benefits to which people - including Marx and Engels - object anyway, not the basic principles of manufacture, commerce and trade. |
Who is talking about an overthrow of capitalism? It's certainly due a reform for reasons of the environment and social responsibility.
But I'd actually say most companies are already ahead of the politicians and the electorate on that score. | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 15:22 - Jun 17 with 4966 views | Darth_Koont |
| The world is fooked on 11:14 - Jun 17 by Guthrum |
What does 'far left thinking' actually mean? That's why I prefer terms like "progressive" (even tho it is, itself, loaded).
Many of those described as "far right" are not by any means so, either, especially when compared with historical examples such as many of the governments of Europe in the 1930s. Things like racism are still hidden and frowned upon. Very few indulge in naked autocracy.
Left vs Right is something of a false dichotomy*, a construct related to the struggle between Soviet/Maoist Communist and Western Capitalist state systems in the second and third quarters of the twentieth century. It dosn't hold particular relevence today, when the opposing sides are environmentalism vs neo-industrialism, nationalism vs confederations/globalism, individualism vs social integration and so on.
* Even the names allude to something as far back as the layout of the French revolutionary parliament in the late 18th century. |
I'd simplify it down to a battle between Equality and Liberty. The two are in competition but that's fine as a balance between the two, one keeping the other in check, gives the best result for society and individuals.
The only problem nowadays is that liberty has been given the upper hand in the US and the UK. Even the right-wing's view of equality as equality of opportunity is libertarian in nature. Not everyone can take the same advantage of opportunities and it increasingly marginalises minorities, communities and classes. | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 16:32 - Jun 17 with 4916 views | WeWereZombies |
| The world is fooked on 12:03 - Jun 17 by Guthrum |
The term in mainstream political use strictly originated with seating arrangements in the Estates General during the last decade of the 18th century. How old is the use of that term in Spanish politics (i.e. does it antedate the French Revolutionary term, or derive from it)? A quick search doesn't reveal any party name incorporating that word earlier than the 1880s. A quick reading of the etymology suggests thet the term was used to differentiate it from the more loaded word "sinistra".
Reactionaries within the British political system were insultingly nicknamed after a bunch of notorious Irish robbers back in the 17th century - and the name stuck (Tories). [Post edited 17 Jun 2019 12:04]
|
Los liberales were left wing by the standards of the day and got seriously going at the start of the nineteenth century, I am afraid my Spanish is not up to a decent trawl to see when izqueirda started to be used towards them and those of a more socialist approach. Closer to home there are even earlier examples of what we now term radical political movements:
'The revolt has been widely used in socialist literature, including by the author William Morris, and remains a potent political symbol for the political left, informing the arguments surrounding the introduction of the Community Charge in the United Kingdom during the 1980s.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27_Revolt
As you discovered 'sinistra' was another loaded term, see also 'sinister' as used in heraldry to show the less 'worthy' part of a crest and 'dexter' as the part of a coat of arms more in line with the 'right hand of God':
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_and_sinister | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 17:59 - Jun 17 with 4878 views | Guthrum |
| The world is fooked on 14:34 - Jun 17 by caught-in-limbo |
Have an uppie for accurate etymology of Euskarazko hitzak. |
Fascinating language, but not one I've yet got round to having a go at actually learning. Still stuck on Sanskrit and Akkadian. | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 18:01 - Jun 17 with 4874 views | Guthrum |
| The world is fooked on 16:32 - Jun 17 by WeWereZombies |
Los liberales were left wing by the standards of the day and got seriously going at the start of the nineteenth century, I am afraid my Spanish is not up to a decent trawl to see when izqueirda started to be used towards them and those of a more socialist approach. Closer to home there are even earlier examples of what we now term radical political movements:
'The revolt has been widely used in socialist literature, including by the author William Morris, and remains a potent political symbol for the political left, informing the arguments surrounding the introduction of the Community Charge in the United Kingdom during the 1980s.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peasants%27_Revolt
As you discovered 'sinistra' was another loaded term, see also 'sinister' as used in heraldry to show the less 'worthy' part of a crest and 'dexter' as the part of a coat of arms more in line with the 'right hand of God':
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_and_sinister |
Being myself left-handed, I'm well aware of the "sinister" slur. Or, for that matter, "cackhanded" in English, which also means a leftie. | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 18:04 - Jun 17 with 4869 views | Guthrum |
| The world is fooked on 14:26 - Jun 17 by caught-in-limbo |
One of the characteristics of chaos is that it is chaotic. If you can manage or steer it, then by definition you have some control over things - so it's not chaos any more. I get your point though.
Chaos is usually a precursor to previously unwanted change. If chaos is introduced prior to change, people then opt for the change instead of the chaos.
Let's see where this chaos leads us. |
I'm hoping for some significant political (especially party) rearrangements. | |
| |
| The world is fooked on 18:05 - Jun 17 with 4867 views | DanTheMan |
| The world is fooked on 18:04 - Jun 17 by Guthrum |
I'm hoping for some significant political (especially party) rearrangements. |
Proportional representation would be nice.
They could even run the campaign without being accused of killing babies. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
