To think there’s little point vilifying Boris when he’s only echoing what millions want to hear?

[dameofdilemma]

Boris (I had to stop myself prefacing that with ‘that twat ‘) seems to have become some sort of pantomime villain but isn’t that a bit pointless?
He (and his cronies) are only voicing the opinions that they think will get them elected, the opinions probably held by millions of voters.

The right wing tabloid press are only printing the (vile) stories that their millions of readers agree with.

Much as Trump isn’t the problem, it’s the millions of voters who support him, who agree with his views, that are the real issue.

We’re entering a new era of fear, violence and division. There will be very few winners. Homelessness, poverty and job insecurity is on the rise. Public services are crippled by underfunding and underresourcing.

Personally we’re getting our ducks in a row to be as financially resilient as possible and to live in the most tolerant part of the country. Good luck everyone!

No, I don't see why we should have to be 'nice' and conciliatory, to wilfully ignorant racists. There comes a point when the combination of determined stupidity,xenophobia and aggression means the person is an irrideemable fucking idiot and best ignored.

Though to be fair, among Leave voters, the majority of the stupid would settle down fairly quickly if revoking Article 50 was swiftly followed by a change of government - or at least of overall government policy - which set about fixing the stuff that such people are really (and rightly) unhappy about, such as low wages and crumbling infrastructure and all the other horrors that are a direct result of austerity.Give everyone functioning healthcare and education systems, trains that run on time, well-maintained streets and green spaces and a living wage and all but the hardcore bigots and bullies will be happy. As for the hardcore bigots and bullies, they can moan and whine on social media and talk radio as much as they like, but otherwise be ignored (unless and until they break the laws on harassment or assault, in which case they can go to prison.)

Mind you, to pull this off, there will have to be some form of brake applied to the rightwing media. Perhaps a combination of HMRC and the Monopolies Commission could sort that out.

The TL;dr version - 'healing the divide' won't be done by pandering to the ignorant racists and the flag-shaggers, and trying to placate them is too dangerous for everyone else.

Standing in awe at the glorious vision created by Reanimated which seems to amount to: do away with democracy, control the media and bring in some sort of authoritarian dictatorship that promises a bright utopian future provided we don’t mind giving up all our freedoms and the fact that people will be put in prison for hate-thought. Anyone in favour, tick the box for Jeremy Corbyn!

What's undemocratic about higher wages and a functional infrastructure? As to control of the media, I don't see it as all that authoritarian to investigate and restrain media outlets which are publishing things that are both harmful and untrue.
And I stated quite clearly that idiots have every right to air their thoughts, and should only be prosecuted if they translate those thoughts into illegal actions (such as assaulting those they don't like).

We already have an established process whereby idiots are arrested and prosecuted for illegal actions.

Who will decide what’s “harmful and untrue”, in this utopian future of which you speak?

Crikey, didn’t realise this thread was still going...

Didn’t intend it to be a Brexit thread, I don’t want to link the rise of the far right necessarily to Brexit, I think it (ie the far right popularity) would have happened in one guise or another anyway.

It’s poverty, low aspirations (because there’s little on offer), low paid and uncertain employment, poor housing, etc that’s the issue.

One thing I do think though is the moment a leader (or his crew) think they shouldn’t be bound by the judiciary or that their decisions shouldn’t be challenged by the judiciary, that way disaster lies.

That would be a matter of enforcing more of the existing laws: those against libel, defamation and blatantly untrue claims (eg a newspaper claiming that some new brand of snake oil cures cancer when it has been proven not to do so.) And perhaps harsher penalties for those (like Johnson, for example) who simply make shit up and print it as facts.

I know it’s not the point of the thread but what’s wrong with saying ducks in a row?

"heal and divide" won't work whilst there are people that willfully generalise about 17.4 million people.

As for putting breaks on the right wing press, are you willing to let the left wing press run wild or are you going to apply these rules equally?

As for enforcing existing laws, we are living in a time where people are being taken to court for stating scientific truths due to not following those that are pushing their definition of what is “harmful and untrue”

Iggly

People need to take some responsibility for their disenfranchisement as well. There’s plenty they could have done

There is plenty that people have done, but as it doesn't bother the two mainstream parties it is pretty worthless, hence people becoming disenfranchised.

It's tricky isn't it

On the right we have surrender bill and on the left we have...

Stab him in the front...
Lynch her ( John macdonnel on ester macvey) and more..
It's seen as a coup, what happening in Parliament, the speaker abusing his power and over 17 million people feeling the establishment... Ie corbyn (strangely because he does support brexit) lib dems are trying to stop the vote..

There is plenty that people have done, but as it doesn't bother the two mainstream parties it is pretty worthless, hence people becoming disenfranchised

And plenty haven’t 🤷🏻‍♀️

And perhaps harsher penalties for those (like Johnson, for example) who simply make shit up and print it as facts.

But how do you judge who’s “making shit up”? And who gets to make that judgement?

Personally I think that “Transwomen are women” is making shit up and presenting it as fact. The Guardian regurgitates the trans ideology at every possible opportunity. Should they get a “harsher penalty”? Should I? Who will decide?

Iggly

Lets be honest we run a two party system, occasionally another party gets a look in through a hung parliament (and then they do whatever they need to to hang on to power).

Unless there is a major change in the system it doesn't matter what the disenfranchised do.

We can't even vote in a negative manner because even though the campaign for NOTA was ratified by the election committee the parties won't put in on the form.

I agree, we do run a two party system but the answer isn’t to not vote. That’s passive aggressive IMO.

The answer is to make noise for change.

I do accept that politicians also have to make changes as well but we should stand up and fight for change.

I’d rather a proportional system of voting.

BJ was deliberately offensive with all his ‘surrender / humbug’ chat because he wanted to change the headlines asap. He didn’t want to talk about the fact that he’d decided to break the law in trying to shut down Parliament for 5 weeks. He knew it was unlawful, there were protests all over the country and in Parliament for gods sake. He just didn’t think anyone would take it to Court. And he doesn’t want to talk about why he refused to give a witness statement to the Court. He was happy to tell the Queen/public that a 5 week prorogation was necessary, but he wouldn’t say that in writing to the Court because he knows he’d get charged with perjury. So instead of dealing with all that, he was as rude as he could be to everyone he could find and now the headlines are about manners in Parliament instead of whether it is a good idea to be ruled by a law-breaking unelected liar who has always wanted to be PM but never read the job description.

And yes I have in the past voted Conservative. Never again. And I don’t really care if we leave the EU or not but I care a great deal that our leader has zero personal integrity. That scares me.

No need to vilify him. He's been perfectly vile for a while now without anyone's help

Oh myyyyy, apocalyptic derail imminent... Someone had to bring up trans ishoos (helpfully providing more proof that anti-trans 'feminism' isn't at all fond of cosying up to the alt-right, oh no, course not...)

helpfully providing more proof that anti-trans 'feminism' isn't at all fond of cosying up to the alt-right, oh no, course not...)

There’s no such thing as “anti-trans feminism”. Don’t be so silly.

He didn’t want to talk about the fact that he’d decided to break the law in trying to shut down Parliament for 5 weeks

He’s also trying to bury that story about him giving his mate/pretty lady public money while mayor of London 🧐🧐🧐

Is the subtext about the pretty lady that they actually had an affair?
I feel sorry for the official whose job this was to refer matter onto others more qualified to properly investigate. Who would want to be a public servant in regulatory role right now.

So instead of dealing with all that, he was as rude as he could be to everyone he could find and now the headlines are about manners in Parliament instead of whether it is a good idea to be ruled by a law-breaking unelected liar who has always wanted to be PM but never read the job description

Well it's in the news now.

I wonder what 'his base' make of this.....unless they think laws don't apply to people if you agree with what they are trying to do?

I don’t actually think he WAS particularly offensive. What’s so offensive about saying “humbug”? And lots of people in the country DO think that the Benn bill is a kind of surrender. This has all been blown way out of proportion and the Labour Party invoked Jo Cox for entirely cynical reasons.

The opposition MPs yelling at him were ridiculous. Jess Phillips took what he said completely out of context and turned it into something it wasn’t. I think Labour is genuinely terrified of him, because he seems to be making inroads with ordinary people who don’t (whoda thunk it) actually like the communist vision presented to them by Corbyn and actually rather like Boris’ style. If anyone’s out of touch with the country it’s the snarling opposition.

Do we forget the context of "humbug".

The questioning MP was saying "Your inflammatory language puts us all in danger." She gave real examples of how threats & abuse were affecting herself & others.

Humbug = "You're talking nonsense" wasn't just personally disrespectful to her, it was dismissive of all the MPs who are unhappy about the abuse & threats they have received.

I wonder if BJ's own children are getting grief. (the acknowledged children, I mean). He might feel differently, then.

What’s so offensive about saying “humbug

When someone is talking about the threats that people receive, the dail abuse and the fear, he dismissed that with the word 'humbug'.

I have immense respect for those MPs who are standing up for trying to not get a disastrous No Deal Brexit despite the vitriol they get. On the way to work yesterday, I saw my MP - a female Labour MP who is not that well known but she has tried to stop No Deal getting through. I have spoken to her a few times. She was waiting at the traffic lights to cross. I just said thank you for what she is trying to do, despite all the tempers in Parliament. Yet, she could easily have been a target for someone. No protection. Just like an ordinary member of the public.

That is courage at the moment

Oh - and Jess Phillips is fantastic.