The Columbia Tour

[ThePoshUns]

2 threads deleted. Sabotaged by the Squad?
Shall we continue?

Or so says the likes of Russell Brand, anyway. We will have to agree to disagree, because I can't see either of us changing the others mind. It's a shame if this is the direction this board is going in, though. Mumsnet seemed the only place where you could be critical of Harry and Meghan without the extreme of either 'you're a racist' or 'yes and their babies are fake and Bill Gates is paying them and I hope Trump deports then' etc.

So very sadly belle, your last paragraph couldn’t be further from the truth.

Absolutely this.

I work with mainstream, liberal people who are also into censoring anything that doesn't fit their ideology. I can't mention JK Rowling, for example.

I personally did not appreciate Harry describing the First Amendment as bonkers.

I agree. I don’t think Harry and Meghan are “political” enough to be trying to engage in censorship, other than to attempt to prevent criticism of themselves. Their dislike of free speech is only coming from a place of wanting to stop any negative comment on their own behaviour. They are thin skinned and take themselves far too seriously and believe that the whole world is out to get them. They will happily jump on the bandwagon of censorship if it suits their agenda but I really don’t think they have a left handed clue what a dangerous thing this would be in a political sense

Not really sure why you think this is conspiracy. Aspen is a group of mainstream figures from media (eg Katy Couric) and policy making, including Nina Jankowicz who worked for the Biden administration as his social media tsar. Harry is one of their key members. Harry and Meghan appeared on a panel last October in NY with Biden’s surgeon general, Vivek Murthy, to talk about online safety (with the same parents that appeared in the recent CBS interview). DEMOS has issued papers regarding online spaces and proposals to censor extreme views using research from Archewell - it’s credited in their report. Perhaps you need to stop watching Russell Brand and look at this more closely.

And so very sadly smilesy that is the truth.

I don't watch Russell Brand, I can assure you. But I'm aware he's done videos about the 'dangers' of the Aspen institute. I am not denying their existence or Harry and Meghan's involvement, I am disagreeing that their work is part of some global scheme to silence people and prop up the elites.

Anyway, this off topic and I have no internet in trying to debate with anyone who is into this nonsense, there is no point. If this place is just going to become a second version of Tattle then I'll leave you all in peace.

In the same way I can't fathom marrying into that family, and having no interest in learning about the history, the palaces, the Commonwealth, the jewels, the books - everything

I'd be like a pig in sh*t, you'd never drag me away from learning about it.

I found all the details about the traditions of the Coronation, Trooping the Colour etc absolutely fascinating.

I'm aware it's not for everyone, but it's a shame Harry has no interest and Meghan (superficially at least) seems like that very SoCal/American stereotype of not being interested in anything not American.

You have no internet. Is that a Freudian slip? If Aspen gets its way, you will have no First Amendment and an internet curated to reflect the “correct” points of view. But I suppose if I point to their papers and plans, that’ll just be nonsense too because you don’t have an argument to counter their own words.

I agree, @MrsFinkelstein . It's a shame how much was wasted on that pair. The late Queen gave Meghan the patronage of the National Theatre, in the mistaken belief that Meghan actually had any interest in the theatre. She wasn't that kind of actress.

I'm sure you're familiar with autocorrect.

The UK doesn't have a first amendment.

I am certain you can't point to a single paper that supports the idea that they're pro censorship. Being against misinformation doesn't equal trying to silence the masses.

More fool me for giving into your tactics and replying again.

America does. All major SM companies are based in the US. America sneezes and the rest of the world catches a cold, right?

Define “misinformation”. Who gets to be the arbiter of that concept? Prince Harry? Do you think he knows fact from fiction? Do you think the human race knows every single piece of correct information there is to know such that a different point of view or theory should be silenced due to this being “misinformation” in the view of the arbiters? How did that work in the past? We’d still believe the sun revolves around the earth if the arbiters of “truth” of that time had been able to suppress a different point of view (and indeed they were able to for many years after Galileo first gave his view which was the truth).

How about more recent received wisdom of the establishment and their truth? About, say, gay people? Or POC? Without dissenting voices railing against established norms, without them putting forward ideas that at the time the establishment would have condemned as “misinformation”, what would have been the fate of those groups?

It’s a slippery and stupid slope when you start suppressing anyone’s voice, no matter how unpalatable. Counter what you think is misinformation with stronger facts and ideas that are better. Not censorship. Because the next arbiters that use those “misinformation” tools might not be nice liberals.

Yes, they are really against misinformation.

Like the time they said Meghan was off to the hospital to have Archie, but he was already born.

Or the time he wrote in his book that he received a phonecall about his great grandmothers death while alone at school- yet he was actually at Balmoral.

The list goes on and so does their misinformation.

Or how about the time the NYT wouldn’t publish Meghans story about convincing P&G to change their sexist advert, because their research found nothing of the sort

Excellent points, @Mymilkshakebringsallthepapstomycar - that's the danger with this censorship.

Really?! I did not know that.

Or the time she said she had nothing to do with Scobie's book..

Or when the Archbishop of Canterbury had to publicly deny that he had performed an illegal marriage..

Or when they couldn't go to Balmoral because Archie was too little to travel that far and then went off to Elton John's place in Ibiza 😂

You can tell by his bedfellows, exactly what he wants to control- Hugh Grant and Steve Cooghan, and the salacious stories around their sex lives. Happy to use their fame to shag women but don’t want you to write about it.

These are rich, privileged men want to use the justice system to cover their exploits. And this is who Harry associates with.

Misinformation : it was Vanity Fair that refused to publish 😂

Excellent post.

Harry and Meghan just want it to be "their" truth, not the objective truth.

This. They are conflating fighting misinformation and controlling free speech with “ waaagh no one believes us, everything happened exactly as we said, why don’t you all love us and you are all big purple meanies”

The UK doesn't have a first amendment.

No, because we have Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 which protects our freedom of speech.
It was not ok Harry to say that the First Amendment is bonkers, can you not see that? If not, please accept our American posters’ view on it. It’s wasn’t acceptable of him to say this.

The irony of the those that seem far lefties not having a problem with these communist viewpoints.?