| Worried by the state of the UK, this board 20:27 - May 16 with 5108 views | thebooks |
When I see posts like:
“None of the parties have the balls to stop the boats or deport those that have arrived illegally, even those that have been caught raping, robbing and wanting an easy life provided by us tax payers.”
I worry. This is how fascism spreads. It’s normalised through stuff like this that just passes by with a couple of down votes. We get used to it. |  | | |  |
| Worried by the state of the UK, this board on 23:03 - May 18 with 239 views | jasondozzell |
| Worried by the state of the UK, this board on 19:23 - May 18 by Herbivore |
I'm well aware he backtracked on the platform he stood on when he ran for leader, so none of this is new. And as I've said, it shows him to not have very firm principles and to blow in the political winds. But that was 6 years ago now and you can't call someone a liar because they've changed their position over that period of time. You can criticise them for lots of things, but he isn't a liar in the way that the likes of Johnson and Farage are as they will happily stand there and tell you black is white if they think that'll benefit them. Starmer is pretty hopeless, weak, and prone to being reactive (hence the shifting positions) but that's different to the kind of behaviour the likes of Johnson and Farage exhibit.
I'll respond to your other post here so we don't have two conversations running. Again, Starmer is weak, doesn't have great political instincts or strong convictions, and he's moved the Labour party to the right of centre in a frankly daft and doomed attempt to hamstring the Tories and Reform. I don't like the rhetoric on immigration. But right-wing authoritarianism? You're going to need to show your workings here and not just blandly state were heading towards fascism in the UK without any evidence. There was evidence we were creeping that way under the Tories (proroguing parliament, politicising institutions that shouldn't be politicised, seeking to leave the EHRC, clamping down on legitimate protest) but what are your comparable examples from the past 9 months of Labour government. |
But changing their position over a period of time suggests a genuine change and a movement towards a new position. This wasn't any of the sort. They never intended to do anything on the pledges list he used to win the leadership. It was designed to win the leadership only.
You cannot lie to your party members (and the wider public) like that and expect it to be seen as just a natural shift in position. It wasn't. It was a cold calculated act of deception. Unfit for office right from that moment and that's before you even get to the rest of the dreadful stuff he's done and overseen.
If anything it is worse behaviour b than Johnson. Johnson is slapdash, unable to take responsibility, prone to lying to cover his backside. But that's not as calculated as Starmer's deceit.
I take your point that we are not yet there with the truly fascist stuff but that's the direction of travel. Starmer's management of his party is authoritarian and undemocratic. Michael Crick is about the only journalist who has been good on covering this. Perhaps because he's retiring.
And all bets are off once Reform form a government. [Post edited 18 May 23:15]
|  | | |
| Worried by the state of the UK, this board on 00:10 - May 19 with 186 views | Churchman |
| Worried by the state of the UK, this board on 23:03 - May 18 by jasondozzell |
But changing their position over a period of time suggests a genuine change and a movement towards a new position. This wasn't any of the sort. They never intended to do anything on the pledges list he used to win the leadership. It was designed to win the leadership only.
You cannot lie to your party members (and the wider public) like that and expect it to be seen as just a natural shift in position. It wasn't. It was a cold calculated act of deception. Unfit for office right from that moment and that's before you even get to the rest of the dreadful stuff he's done and overseen.
If anything it is worse behaviour b than Johnson. Johnson is slapdash, unable to take responsibility, prone to lying to cover his backside. But that's not as calculated as Starmer's deceit.
I take your point that we are not yet there with the truly fascist stuff but that's the direction of travel. Starmer's management of his party is authoritarian and undemocratic. Michael Crick is about the only journalist who has been good on covering this. Perhaps because he's retiring.
And all bets are off once Reform form a government. [Post edited 18 May 23:15]
|
I honestly don’t think Reform will ever form a government. They’re a protest movement headed by a disgusting wind machine supported by losers, weirds and disaffected cretins. They’ve got too many years to stagnate and be found out.
The debate on Starmer v Johnson is both interesting and funny. Talk about a race to the bottom. Sir Kier: his attributes seem to be he isn’t a Tory, Corbyn, threatening (in an obvious way) or the least bit interesting. No problem with the last bit and we know he’s a bit rubbish, but I need to read more to judge whether he’s lied on Johnson’s epic scale.
As for Johnson? Head clown of a troop of them. A real life sack of sht who was lazy, self opinionated, quick to claim credit because he actually has no practical ability whatsoever in anything. He might be a nice bloke. Who cares.
So what are we left with? Not much beyond a hope that the appalling Farage and his bunch of swivel eyed f-wits implode - which I think and of course hope they will. But only if Starmer starts doing more than just gassing on. Action time, Kier! |  | | |
| Worried by the state of the UK, this board on 07:44 - May 19 with 85 views | Herbivore |
| Worried by the state of the UK, this board on 23:03 - May 18 by jasondozzell |
But changing their position over a period of time suggests a genuine change and a movement towards a new position. This wasn't any of the sort. They never intended to do anything on the pledges list he used to win the leadership. It was designed to win the leadership only.
You cannot lie to your party members (and the wider public) like that and expect it to be seen as just a natural shift in position. It wasn't. It was a cold calculated act of deception. Unfit for office right from that moment and that's before you even get to the rest of the dreadful stuff he's done and overseen.
If anything it is worse behaviour b than Johnson. Johnson is slapdash, unable to take responsibility, prone to lying to cover his backside. But that's not as calculated as Starmer's deceit.
I take your point that we are not yet there with the truly fascist stuff but that's the direction of travel. Starmer's management of his party is authoritarian and undemocratic. Michael Crick is about the only journalist who has been good on covering this. Perhaps because he's retiring.
And all bets are off once Reform form a government. [Post edited 18 May 23:15]
|
Whether it was calculated deceit or whether he realised when he got the leadership that to make Labour electable he needed to shift away from Corbynite policies is something that very few people know for sure. Commentators, party members, and Labour supporters can all take a view on that. Either way, it shows him up as not having strong principles but whether he's a liar or a reactive, dull pragmatist is more open for debate.
What's not open for debate is that Johnson frequently said things that were demonstrably false, that he and everyone knew to be demonstrably false. Probably the most telling example was when confronted by a new dad on a hospital visit he tried to claim there were no cameras there while they were being filmed and photographed from multiple angles. That tells you everything about him, clear lies just roll off his tongue.
Anyway, this isn't me defending Starmer, I think he's sh!t to be honest, I just don't think it's helpful to lump him in with someone like Johnson who has repeatedly shown himself up as completely dishonest and self-serving. I am not convinced that applies to Starmer and I don't think the evidence you've put forward clearly demonstrates that without making huge unfounded assumptions about his intent.
And we aren't not there yet with the fully fascist stuff, we're nowhere near. Starmer has been crap but he's not bringing in policies that are authoritarian, there's nothing he's done so far as PM that suggests he's going down that route. If Reform gets in, and that's a massive if, what they choose to do is on them. If Starmer was too weak to provide a good alternative, that part is on him, but this is like people blaming Corbyn for the Tories being terrible because not enough people chose to vote for him. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
