AIBU to question why crypto investors are heavily funding Reform?

All we can do is concentrate on supporting ourselves and not being a net burden to the taxpayer. Rather than sticking our noses in other people's finanaces and deciding they need to give more money to charity. As if we had some moral right to judge others. It's such a horrible, shrivelled up trait.

If they have been paying tax. When you keep money digitally it is there in order for it to be hard to check.

They aren't being funded by people who openly declare their earnings and don't have offshore accounts, or people who fund services people can access out of the goodness of their heart. They are being funded by people who hoard wealth, which increases inequality.

Maybe. Maybe Reform are the fightback against the divison caused by woke policies and are actually two sides of the same coin; those victimised by woke see Reform as the solution. Reform aren't arguing for anything extreme btw. Nothing that anyone would have thought wild a few decades ago.

The "left" are fairly homogeneous in British politics. The Greens are pretty much the same as Labour, although a bit more successful in highlighting how Gaza should be the main priority for any UK MP (ahem).

Like the unions fund Labour. To do things that work in their favour!

@Pineneedlesincarpet who has been 'victimised by woke' and what are 'woke policies'? I mean, those just sound like meaningless soundbites from the right.

Rubbish. Theres no law requiring anyone to help others or give to any particular charity. It's entirely personal choice. Its their own money not yours. They pay a vast amount of tax and created a vast amount of jobs so Id say they have given back more than enough.

And who is to say they don't give philanthropically. They might not be Harry and Meghan and feel the need to shout about it. Look at George Michael.

If you do nothing to even try to help others on a philanthropic level, it is just greed.

Being rich and successful is not a bad thing. The left need to stop the knee jerk denigration of any one who has ever done better than the average person.

I would definitely have preferred you used the word Labour because that would at least make logical sense.

I still definitely don’t agree, and I find the idea that recognising the structural biases people face because of their identities is what has set race relations back, rather than the aggressive demonisation of immigrants and belittling of their contributions to our society, completely laughable.

But I do value a society with a plurality of opinions, so I think it’s good you’re able to hold and express that view.

I actually saw Kemi Badenoch arguing - quite powerfully, I thought - that Reform were the wokest of parties, because they’re so reliant on grievance politics and a victim mentality. So, I don’t think wokeness and identity politics are the sole preserve of “the left”.

You're arguing in a partisan way of course, as am I. If you prefer to use the word "Labour" rather than "the left"(I was trying not to be too partisan) then the point stands. Labour have been incredibly divisive.

But the left as a whole have been divisive. For example, the "woke agenda" is probably not right wing. And it's taught everyone to judge people on the basis of their immutable characteristics rather than on merit and character. It's probably put things like race relations back decades sadly.

@Pineneedlesincarpet

It is genuinely ridiculous to say “the left” as a whole has been damaging and divisive. Reform is one political party with stated aims, a deliberate communications strategy and named representatives speaking on their behalf. Ultimately, their party leadership is responsible for their rhetoric and the tone with which they engage in political debate. In Reform’s case that’s always angry, always peddling outrage - usually against minorities. “The left” doesn’t have a communications strategy. It is a broad ideology - encompassing several different political parties, and many grassroots organisations. Maybe some people who have left wing opinions use rhetoric you don’t like - but there’s no leader of “the left” authorising them to engage like that. Are you genuinely saying there should be no left wing to our political debate?

Firstly, on immigration, I’d say what Reform has done is massively oversimplify a legitimate, nuanced debate. Of course there’s a discussion to be had on immigration, but not the toxic, black and white shouting match Reform have poisoned our political discourse with.

Secondly, Dale Vince and Lord Sainsbury - and other donors- have made their money in established, regulated areas of the economy. That’s very different to the C-money flooding in.

And thirdly, wasn’t Reform’s whole pitch that they were different to the old, establishment parties? This shows they’re at best the same, old.

If I was a centre-right Conservative supporter I’d be furious at Reform for splitting the right and dragging our political discourse into the gutter.

It's disgusting to me that two men think this show of wealth, when so many are struggling with the cost of living, is appropriate. Competing with each other in their own wealthy willy waving contest on a global stage.

Imagine what we could do with that for healthcare or mental health or housing services. Hopefully voters will be wondering if these two have ever paid taxes and why they haven't donated to anything that is actively helping communities.

I guess we’ll see. Huge speculation around an early election and that doesn’t usually come from nowhere. I’d agree that he’d normally be minded to wait until the end of the term, but I think the mega-donations might change this. No party has ever faced an opponent with such enormous financial fire power.

I wonder if Andy Burnham might be tempted to call an election whilst Reform are still drowning in sleaze and before they can effectively deploy the mega-donations. Reform are still chaotic and badly managed, completely hapless at Press/PR and haven’t developed any workable policies. The chances of a Reform majority government are still absolutely tiny, albeit Labour would probably lose most, if not all, of their majority. I remember when Gordon Brown bottled calling an early election and deeply regretted it.

I think it’s worth noting that, whilst Dale Vince (about £5m to Labour) and Lord Sainsbury (about £20m to multiple parties over decades) have made political donations, they are clearly not of the same order of magnitude as the donations from the two crapto investors. Between them they have given Reform almost £100m in a couple of years and that’s not counting personal gifts to Farage. We have never seen anything like this in the UK. They are going to expect something in return.

Maybe, but I suspect ultimately it will come down to a tactical decision of whether he’s more likely to win now, or in 2029! If the data suggests an early election has better odds then he’ll go for it.