Westminstenders: The end of tribalism

[RedToothBrush]

There are signs that traditional party alignment might well have broken.

The Tories have split, labour are pretending they have not.

The pattern so far seems to be closely following the EU. This favours a Tory majority.

A long way to go.

If a commentator confused 2 Jewish people of the same name and hence accused an innocent person of Islamophobia, then I'd hammer him for that

I'd also expect him to issue a grovelling apology to avoid llibel damages

Mistigri

There will always be debate around the issue surely - debate isn't the same as disagreement - as this is an issue of science then discussion will always be ongoing.

There is no discussion to be had about the fact of the Holocaust. It happened. People who try to pretend it didn't deserved some kind of distinguishing title. Denier seemed fitting and it pains me to see it bandied about elsewhere.

One careless mistake doesn't invalidate a whole career, but it should give pause for thought,
to check his facts properly in future, since he has such a wide audience

Some people may only have heard of the original allegation,
especially if they are not his regular readers and were only guided to it by the Fail etc

"I’d say it’s uncalled for to paint a Jewish journalist as Islamophobic over a mistake. "

I am entitled to take a view on the motives of a journalist who libels another public figure because of a failure to do normal journalistic due diligence.

I have always been irritated by "climate change denier"

It blatantly tries to piggyback onto outrage at Holocaust denial

Arsedarkly the greenhouse effect was established as a scientific fact by Arrhenius over a century ago...

And I am entitled to take a view on the motives of a party leader who praises a mural with a blindingly obvious antisemitic image who claims he didn't realise the problem with it. One of these people potentially affects the lives of thousands. The other is a journo/author.

It blatantly tries to piggyback onto outrage at Holocaust denial

Exactly. And once that was done others felt able to appropriate it for their own cause, which devalues it's original power to express outrage at wretches such as David Irving

Mistigri not sure what argument you are trying to make but I am not arguing against the existence of climate change. I am trying to make a point about the importance of language

Yep, bellini and others are entitled to question a leadership who blatantly squash attempts to investigate their party's Islamophobia
And others are entitled to think that a party that supports self-ID is toxic to women.

Jeez, what did we ever do to get landed with such dreadful party leaders - and parties.

Arsedarkly the greenhouse effect was established as a scientific fact by Arrhenius over a century ago...

If it was identified a century ago, then it suggests that it's a natural phenomenon - certainly not caused by man made activities.

That said, there was some research a while back suggesting that our neolithic forebears forestry clearance programmes might have started the climate change we are seeing today. Or any number of volcanoes that may have decided to help out on the way.

I gave up giving a shit about climate science a while back. Probably when it was obvious that irrespective of the causes, it would probably be sensible to do something to accommodate climate change rather than waste a lot of poor peoples money on a spectacularly ineffectual and vague promise of "reversing" it. Because - as with austerity - it'll be the poorest that will pay for "saving the planet".

The second some whizz kid realised you could call something "organic" and double the price and people would pay was the second any hope of tackling climate change was lost to the money men, as the conmen moved in.

Jeez, what did we ever do to get landed with such dreadful party leaders - and parties.

I agree the parties and leaders are all shit in their own way. So it's a case of voting for the one you feel is the least shit.Although my vote is not going to make an iota of difference, as in this constituency they could put a blue rosette on a pig and it would get voted in.

I've realised who the MSM will blame if Labour wins the GE - Corbyn

Part of the problem is that people think its a presidential system. This started with Blair where style replaced substance. Clegg and Cameron continued this - 40 something men who look good in smart suits. Look at the party policies not the leader.

Agree ghost

I don't think it's a presidential system but tbe quality of its elected leader speaks volumes about a party.

If it was identified a century ago, then it suggests that it's a natural phenomenon - certainly not caused by man made activities.

The Industrial Revolution didn’t happen in the 19th century?

Sorry if your life hangs in the balance. I've got my own serious shit. Which is why I don't cling to people who make promises that they will make it all fine. Rather why I didn't vote for Brexit.

bellini I am pretty much broadly in agreement with your posts, but I cant believe the dismissiveness of your first sentence.

I'm with catfromjapan we need to try and find a common ground - which IMO is the best possible Brexit if we have to, or pref remain.

There is no good to come from tearing ourselves apart.

Waves hello from a country where everybody thinks that UK politics is mad

I'm not being dismissive. But I don't think one person's serious shit trumps another persons.

Jeez, what did we ever do to get landed with such dreadful party leaders - and parties.

We allowed politics to become a career, in the name of allowing all and sundry to become politicians.

Going back - let's say 150 years - politics was the preserve of the landed gentry (no women, obviously). The only way to be a politician was to have "independent means". Very few seats were truly contested, and most MPs pretty much inherited the position, along with the estate and title.

One of the biggest bangs-per-buck change we could (spoiler alert, never gonna happen) make to our current system is to limit how long a person may hold a seat. My feeling is, in a 5-year parliamentary cycle, 2 terms is enough.

When my DB moved to the US, in the 90s, and started engaging in their politics, the very first thing that struck him (in Tennessee) was how much the idea of the part-time-politician still carries weight in some places.

"If it was identified a century ago, then it suggests that it's a natural phenomenon - certainly not caused by man made activities.

Jesus, that's an embarrassing post. It was identified theoretically and in the lab. Since then we've done a fucking enormous planetary scale study on the subject!

I agree on the need to find common ground. Which is why I have been talking to the people in the Brexit Arms. I doubt I have much common ground with them . Nor do I have much common ground with Corbynistas.

Corbyn was elected leader of the Labour party because he was the only candidate who offered a return to Labour's social democratic priciples. The membership rejected the continuation of Blairite centrist, light touch Thatcherism. And rightly so.

I'm a late baby boomer, which some think belong to Generation X. I voted remain, though all my siblings and mum voted remain, bar one - he's a boomer.

look to the party politics, not the leader is meaningless when it comes to MSM in the UK. The Labour leader will always be up for scrutiny. No one is ever satisfied. Can you imagine for one minute if Labour had a leader that behaved like Johnson?