Is Keir Starmer right?

[AdamRyan]

Today he called the Conservatives "the political wing of the flat earth society" following Liz Truss' comments about the deep state in the US.

I am a big starmer fan, so want to sanity check my opinion, which is that the Conservatives seem to have bought into a lot of conspiracy theories recently, such as "no go" areas in Birmingham, London being "controlled by Islamists", the civil service being run by transactivists as well as Truss' comments.

Or do you think this is a smear and the Conservatives are being reasonable?

If I had a third option I'd also include a "meh - not interested" option for people

Video for people who want to listen to what Starmer said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-68418502?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=65df29c746578322549bdd92%26Watch%3A%20Starmer%20says%20Tories%20are%20%E2%80%98political%20wing%20of%20flat%20earth%20society%E2%80%99%262024-02-28T12%3A52%3A33.349Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:091e6916-4b3d-4198-adef-cf8a7b9e76bb&pinned_post_asset_id=65df29c746578322549bdd92&pinned_post_type=share

YABU - the Conservatives are not getting sucked into conspiracies, this is a smear

YANBU - the Conservatives need a large consignment of tin foil ASAP

Do you have an opinion on Truss'speech? Or are you just echoing the 'knowing what a woman is'?

I do think that Truss' speech was bordering on lunacy. I think some of the other examples provided by OP require a way more nuanced and balanced discussion than anyone is really interested in having. As referenced in my very first post on this thread about the threat to MPs which none of the mainstream media is paying much attention to.

And I would love to know what a woman is. No-one seems able to provide a definition. I do realise Starmer has backtracked and sort of updated his definition once he realised people didn't like his previous position so that's vaguely reassuring.

Whatever your position on gender issues, it should be possible to have a conversation about other matters, including a former PM (current MP) lending support to a movement that want to replace democracy with a religious theocracy (that will continue its attacks on abortion rights, among other things) without endless “he doesn’t know what a woman is” type comments.

Using the issue to try and shut down discourse on other topics, and to deflect criticism from anyone on the right (including on other issues of women’s rights), makes me skeptical as to whether those posters have genuine concerns or are just trying to leverage the matter to absolve any conservative of accountability in any circumstances.

Of course it should be possible to have discussions on a range of issues. That's what politics is all about. But it's almost impossible because every word a politician utters is dissected to within an inch of its life, while the actual issues they're trying to raise are ignored. Language is important and should be considered but it also shouldn't be the only news story.

Re the OP, I think that Truss is useless and desperate. I think that Starmer using the insult about the flat earth society was ill judged in the light of his apparent lack of even the most basic grasp of biology. I think that there ARE no go areas in some of our cities although I only have experience of this in the North. I also think that institutions such as the NHS, police, civil service have been captured to some degree by pushers of a harmful political ideology.

Re the OP, I think that Truss is useless and desperate

agree

I think that Starmer using the insult about the flat earth society was ill judged in the light of his apparent lack of even the most basic grasp of biology

disagree. I think we can all agree that the trans and gender debates are very real but clearly Starmers opinions don’t align with yours, they broadly do with mine. I dislike a lot of elements of the trans movement but it’s a section of society that are still a section of society. I believe there’s room for compromise.

I think that there ARE no go areas in some of our cities although I only have experience of this in the North

No go areas based on religion? What about a strong population of a particular religion makes it a no go area? Have you personally been attacked for not being the same religion? Or is this based on your comfort levels operating in a section of society that doesn’t live up to your ideals of what ‘English’ should look and behave like?

I also think that institutions such as the NHS, police, civil service have been captured to some degree by pushers of a harmful political ideology

and what ideology is that? Are we back to the gender thing or is there something broader? ‘Captured’ is a very loaded word to use, especially if you’re not going to expand on the ‘harmful political ideology’.

You can discuss anything you like but, now bear with me here, you have to initiate some input into that conversation or indeed initiate the conversation itself, if there are no current ones to your liking.

its ridiculous impotence to join a conversation and then moan that it isn’t the one you want to have. No one is obliged to spoon feed you a debate that captures your interest. Join it and contribute, start it and lead it or just read it but don’t pop off at people just because you don’t like the conversation they’re having.

I find this sentence interesting from @Cornettoninja - "or is this based on your comfort levels operating in a section of society that doesn’t live up to your ideals of what ‘English’ should look and behave like?"

What English, and indeed British, looks like has changed significantly in the past 50-70 years. Integration has been the poor relative of immigration. But the Guardian would have you believe questioning the changing culture of our society is far right ideology.

Why shouldn't we be able to explore this without comments like the one from @Cornettoninja ?

Paul Embery speaks a lot of sense on this subject:

The typical contemporary Labour MP is almost certain to be a university-educated Europhile who is more comfortable in the leafy enclaves of north London than the party's historic heartlands. As a result, Labour has become radically out of step with the culture and values of working-class Britain. Drawing on his background as a firefighter and trade unionist from Dagenham, Paul Embery argues that this disconnect has been inevitable since the Left political establishment swallowed a poisonous brew of economic and social liberalism.
They have come to despise traditional working-class values of patriotism, family and faith and instead embraced globalisation, rapid demographic change and a toxic, divisive brand of identity politics. Embery contends that the Left can only revive if it speaks once again to the priorities of working-class people by combining socialist economics with the cultural politics of belonging, place and community. No one who wants to really understand why our politics has become so dysfunctional and what the Left can do to fix it can afford to miss this authentic, insightful and passionate book

Conspiraloons!! Love it....

Are you watching question time tonight? I think my "echo chamber" is pretty big!

@JimBobsWife It might well have changed, but I really don't think it's been 'captured by Islamists'. With regards to the op do I think they've fallen for conspiracy theories? Mostly no, but they do like to stoke the fringes around many of them. They also seem impossibly addicted to promoting culture wars. The claims that Christmas has been cancelled or the civil service have been captured by woke workers with an 'agenda' or that 'they' (whoever they are) want to ban cars .....I mean it's abject nonsense.
Lets be realistic power, money and influence in this country is largely held by rich white upper and upper middle class men. The establishment.... The old Etonians and Oxford PPE grads, landowners, asset owners, media owners and landed gentry. And they are largely quite socially conservative.
The idea that people from diverse backgrounds or the LGBTQ wokerati have captured the media, politics and law and are using it to their own ends is frankly laughable (and yes a bit conspiratorial frankly). The Tories are the ruling class, they've been in charge for 13 years. And nothing much has changed. The gender pay gap still exists, violence against women is still horribly common, social mobility is still almost non existent. Representation of diversity in key professions is still shit (I could go on). So if we've been captured by the wokerati they are remarkably ineffectual in getting woke values to have an impact...

Oh that was me. I think he's a great leader. When I say "I love him" I mean I'm a fan. Like saying "I love Billie Eilish". Not "I love him" in a stalker way

@AdamRyan I gave up on QT ages ago when Fiona Bruce admonished Prof Robert Winston for saying sex was a biological fact (or something along those lines) and reminded him that was only 'his opinion'.

Same with Kirsty Wark and Newsnight, basically a propaganda show for her own views.

I'm sure the 'impartial' BBC echo chamber is very large and loud tonight! You'll feel right at home.

You might find this article about North London interesting. Written for Americans about the political connotations of "North London"

https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-the-uk/the-hypocrisy-of-rishi-sunaks-north-london-slur

I actually think the 'North London' tag is lazy and meaningless. I'm more interested by the disconnect from the Labour heartland that Paul talks about and the cultural and social snobbery which has led to this.

Labour will no doubt win the next election but it won't be because core working class Labour supporters are desperate to vote for them. It's because there's literally no other choice.

Yeah I know right. It's a shame the Tories are all mouth and no trousers.
I used to be jealous that Wales and Scotland had more choice. But I'm happy with my labour vote this time.

This is jaw dropping
https://twitter.com/gemmagould/status/1579387130203500547?s=20

Well, yes, which is what I said. It's normal especially in the run up to an election, and I'd expect it from any party with regards to the people they see as their main opponents.

I don't see what he's criticizing as especially significant though, in pretty much the same way I don't think of the gay giraffe type stuff as all that significant. It reveals certain individuals as fools, or credulous, but it's not really the kind of thing that makes me choose or not choose a particular party to vote for. Though it might make me disinclined to vote for a particular MP if it was my riding.

Starmer himself brought up flat earth/science-deniers. So it absolutely fits this topic. As much as you wish it didn't for your own agenda.

Odd that so many of us think it doesn’t, isn’t it?

@TempestTost okay. well debates and PMQ’s aren’t platforms for campaigning, the questions are led by the governments actions, if you find the line of questioning ridiculous it’s not solely on the questioner. It would be ridiculous to stand up and not question (on behalf of constituents) issues that are at the forefront of public discussions.

you decide how to use your vote by whatever criteria you wish, opposition to a sitting government doesn’t allow much room for setting the agenda though. Manifestos will come out as and when the GE is formally announced, unfortunately the current government is weaponising this by dragging it out as long as they can knowing that firm campaigning pledges can’t be made until they draw their line in the sand. Given how volatile this government has proved themselves to be firm pledges can’t be made because who knows what they’ll do next and if it’ll be fixable when they leave.

... the Left can only revive if it speaks once again to the priorities of working-class people by combining socialist economics with the cultural politics of belonging, place and community.

Is that really what people want? The BNP didn't get very far with this approach.

Exactly. If a thread was about David Icke having a go at fake moon landing conspiracy theory believers, it would be relevant to point out he doesn't have a leg to stand on.

2 or 3 posters is not 'many', let alone 'so many'. 97% of the thread disagrees with you. That, is an overwhelming majority.