Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on May 12, 2015, 08:27:35 am
-
Murdoch supported the Tories relentlessly throughout the election campaign. There was barely a day went by without The Sun running an article ridiculing Miliband. Then, when Cameron forgot which football team he supports, The Sun ran a piece that said,"It was obviously just a silly mistake by a speech-write." Just IMAGINE how they'd have dealt with Miliband if he'd done the same thing.
Anyway, Murdoch detests the BBC. It might be the greatest broadcasting organisation in the world, but it's in competition against Sky. And, like the NHS, it's not supposed to work. The Right just KNOWS that publicly funded systems can't be as good as the private sector.
Murdoch's press has been hammering the BBC every chance it's had.
And now the payback. Cameron has chosen his Culture Secretary who will decide the future of the BBC. It's a man who said last year "The licence fee is as unfair as the Poll Tax."
Here we go...
-
Lovely man. Extremely cultured:
(https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/11219701_10153789665738356_8970666572823769673_n.jpg?oh=459f43ea475e12f1d042b3c5731e0b6a&oe=56064640)
-
It's a real dissapointment. Being put in charge of DCMS will hold back a lot of progress that has been made by the football supporter groups over the last few years. He just doesn't 'get' football.
-
The new sports minister is Tracey Crouch, who is a qualified football coach. She might be a good appointment.
-
Really concerned about the future of the BBC and I'm really struggling to find where the bias was. IMO it was the other way and Murdoch's newspapers hardly gave Labour/ L/Dems a chance in the press.
It seems as if near absolute power is already running away with these Pillocks. He wants to reward Murdoch, ensure his rags continue to totally undermine Opposition parties especially villifying the L/Dems.
Of course he will pamper to the 1922 committee who were non too happy during the last 5 years and then down the line fractures will appear when they want more and more concessions.
He's playing a very dangerous game thankfully.
-
There was no bias.. Not towards Labour and the Lib dems any way.... Busy little employees of Murdoch like call me Dave will be running round now to do their master's bidding, stifling any dissenting voices that might spoil the party line.
My heart bleeds for the poor soul today bleating that his job was akin to a zero hours contract.. Poor Boris and his £67k posting. :headbang: :facepalm
Perhaps he should try doing something worthwhile for a true pittance like the thousands of carers in this god forsaken country.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/listen-a-carer-weeps-over-tory-cut-fears-109470
-
There are at least as many arguments for BBC bias in the other direction. Why the BBC has hammered on the line that the deficit is still the key political issue, when it is demonstrably not, for example.
When both sides have complaints about bias, it probably means that a sensible, balance line is being struck.
The problem that the Tories have with the BBC is not one of bias. It is an ideological one. Their philosophy is that publicly funded bodies are supposed to be, by definition, inferior to private ones. The BBC, like the NHS, is a permanent reminder that this is mistaken. So the Right will always attack its basic premise and will highlight each and every failing, no matter how tiny.
Of course, we could have a totally private broadcasting system. Then we could have such wonderful services as Berlusconi's RAI, or Murdoch's Fox. That'd be good wouldn't it....
-
A few years ago now I sat down in a living room in upstate New York and forced myself to watch a days worth of American television. I admit I channel hopped. Quite a lot. I didn't see an alternative tbh. The pig ignorance, the venom, the lack of balance, the gainsaying of self evident truths, the cretinous belief that the viewing public could only concentrate for 90 seconds at a time, and, that words of 3 syllables or more would entirely baffle them even inside that 90 second slot, well, they simply blew my mind.
I still haven't worked out how any country, with that level of ignorance and that absence of thinking, can operate as if it is the leader of the world. I've got only one theory. It comes from Shakespeare: Richard II. He suggested that some people are born great, some achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them. When you remember the vast natural resources the Yanks continue to squander with such gay abandon, and, the huge inflow of immigrants in the 19th century, well, you can easily see how the US ended up as the example, par excellence, of Shakespeares third category. I hope the Yanks have read 'The Rise and Fall of Great Powers' by Paul Kennedy. Hubris beckons.
Murdoch, Fox and their ilk have an absolutely enormous debt to mankind already. And this equally cretinous government we now have are going to allow them to increase it even further.
BobG
-
A few years ago now I sat down in a living room in upstate New York and forced myself to watch a days worth of American television. I admit I channel hopped. Quite a lot. I didn't see an alternative tbh. The pig ignorance, the venom,the lack of balance, the gainsaying of self evident truths, the cretinous belief that the viewing public could only concentrate for 90 seconds at a time, and, that words of 3 syllables or more would entirely baffle them even inside that 90 second slot, well, they simply blew my mind.
I still haven't worked out how any country, with that level of ignorance and that absence of thinking, can operate as if it is the leader of the world. I've got only one theory. It comes from Shakespeare: Richard II. He suggested that some people are born great, some achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them. When you remember the vast natural resources the Yanks continue to squander with such gay abandon, and, the huge inflow of immigrants in the 19th century, well, you can easily see how the US ended up as the example, par excellence, of Shakespeares third category. I hope the Yanks have read 'The Rise and Fall of Great Powers' by Paul Kennedy. Hubris beckons.
Murdoch, Fox and their ilk have an absolutely enormous debt to mankind already. And this equally cretinous government we now have are going to allow them to increase it even further.
BobG
Gee Bob, I'm glad you weren't in my living room in upstate NY as I would not have invited anyone who generalises to the extent that you do and quotes the same diatribes over and over, ad nauseam. But I have to wonder why you would even come here when you obviously despise us so much. :facepalm:
-
Yes Bob they are aiming for a "private" system of broadcasting with a total Tory slant . It's easy really Murdoch's sky will become the state broadcasting company or else and take money from the electorate . Sky will then give 'said' money for future Tory elections . hence the whole electorate ,regardless of affiliation, will fund their campaigns.
-
Fair enough Sandy. I'll try to not be honest next time then.
Bob
-
To be fair, Bob, that's "honest" from a very narrow perspective. I have family and friends in the states and they don't for one second accept what the media giants tell them without challenge.
-
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
-
David Cameron: The best Prime Minister money can buy.
-
David Cameron: The best Prime Minister money can buy.
Thanks for that. I didn't realise that was the reason he won. Silly me thought it was because he leads a party that knows how to generate 1000 new jobs every day when in power. I didn't realise Labour lost because they always increase unemployment and leave the economy in a mess every time they have a period in office.
You live and learn.
-
Just for the record. I'd keep the BBC pretty much as it currently is. I don't hold with the view that it is left wing. I think it strikes the right balance in its reporting of politics.
-
Just for the record. I'd keep the BBC pretty much as it currently is. I don't hold with the view that it is left wing. I think it strikes the right balance in its reporting of politics.
I agree with both you and Billy, it is a puerile and pathetic attack on the BBC. IC 1967, please stop claiming that ALL the good things in the Coalition were Tory ideas.............I suggest you revisit the 2010 L/Dem manifesto. You like them ( the Tories btw ) want to claim all the credit for the achievements.
Incidentally , I understand that L/Dem Central office have had to employ extra staff to deal with all the new subscriptions to the party. I know I was on the phone to them today they are inundated.
-
That's the same for all parties after an election. Labour have gained 30,000 new members since the defeat.
-
Just for the record. I'd keep the BBC pretty much as it currently is. I don't hold with the view that it is left wing. I think it strikes the right balance in its reporting of politics.
I agree with both you and Billy, it is a puerile and pathetic attack on the BBC. IC 1967, please stop claiming that ALL the good things in the Coalition were Tory ideas.............I suggest you revisit the 2010 L/Dem manifesto. You like them ( the Tories btw ) want to claim all the credit for the achievements.
Incidentally , I understand that L/Dem Central office have had to employ extra staff to deal with all the new subscriptions to the party. I know I was on the phone to them today they are inundated.
I apologise abjectly for doing this. You are quite right. The LibDems should take a lot of credit for the last 5 years. I have a lot of time for them and wish them well in their re-building job.
-
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
Have you been asleep for the past 25 years? The Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. Since then Russia with it's oligarchs and Putin's dictatorial rule, is proving to be the atypical right-wing fascist state you aspire for us!
-
Must say apart from the news I never watch bbc so I feel robbed every time I pay my licence fee
-
Must say apart from the news I never watch bbc so I feel robbed every time I pay my licence fee
Do you watch the news there because you feel it's balanced though......I do . There is a certain weird paranoia in the way that the Tories perceive the BBC. I think BST alluded to the possible reasons behind that earlier I.e. it's a "public" and not a "private" service.
The envy of the world is our BBC but apparently not good enough for a party that wants to gain 'edges' wherever possible and pay their dues to donors.
-
David Cameron: The best Prime Minister money can buy.
Thanks for that. I didn't realise that was the reason he won. Silly me thought it was because he leads a party that knows how to generate 1000 new jobs every day when in power. I didn't realise Labour lost because they always increase unemployment and leave the economy in a mess every time they have a period in office.
You live and learn.
Yet again Mick makes a prize pillock of himself by not reading what someone else has written (or deliberately distorting it for his own pathetic attempts to be contrary).
I did not say the election has been bought: I said David Cameron has.
-
David Cameron: The best Prime Minister money can buy.
Thanks for that. I didn't realise that was the reason he won. Silly me thought it was because he leads a party that knows how to generate 1000 new jobs every day when in power. I didn't realise Labour lost because they always increase unemployment and leave the economy in a mess every time they have a period in office.
You live and learn.
Yet again Mick makes a prize pillock of himself by not reading what someone else has written (or deliberately distorting it for his own pathetic attempts to be contrary).
I did not say the election has been bought: I said David Cameron has.
Excuse me. Far from being a prize pillock I have enhanced my already excellent reputation. May I remind you that I was the only one who predicted a Tory majority. I made this prediction when Labour were miles ahead in the polls more than a year ago. I was ridiculed for it. Not any more.
Who was the one who predicted deflation more than a year ago? That's right it was me.
Who predicted 2 out of the first 6 in the Grand National? Yes that was me again.
Here's another couple of predictions for you. Labour will not win either of the next 2 elections. Within 10 years, UKIP will have replaced them as the main opposition to the Tories.
Get in.
-
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
Have you been asleep for the past 25 years? The Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. Since then Russia with it's oligarchs and Putin's dictatorial rule, is proving to be the atypical right-wing fascist state you aspire for us!
I'm sorry you've lost me there (not for the first time). Where have I ever said I want us to be like Russia? Evidence man. Where is it?
What about China? I notice you don't disagree with me on that one. At last we've found something we agree on.
Get in.
-
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
Have you been asleep for the past 25 years? The Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. Since then Russia with it's oligarchs and Putin's dictatorial rule, is proving to be the atypical right-wing fascist state you aspire for us!
I'm sorry you've lost me there (not for the first time). Where have I ever said I want us to be like Russia? Evidence man. Where is it?
What about China? I notice you don't disagree with me on that one. At last we've found something we agree on.
Get in.
That's the same for all parties after an election. Labour have gained 30,000 new members since the defeat.
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
Have you been asleep for the past 25 years? The Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. Since then Russia with it's oligarchs and Putin's dictatorial rule, is proving to be the atypical right-wing fascist state you aspire for us!
I'm sorry you've lost me there (not for the first time). Where have I ever said I want us to be like Russia? Evidence man. Where is it?
What about China? I notice you don't disagree with me on that one. At last we've found something we agree on.
Get in.
Mick, Russia and China certainly don't operate anywhere near the same way as our left of centre Labour party.
Russia is run by right wing mobsters and fascists and well China seems to have embraced a sort of capitalism. In that Billy was correct ; you asserted that the lefties as you put it had more in common with Russia and China. That is far from the case and never has the Labour party in this country worked like the Soviet/Russian fascists nor the Chinese post Mao and their 21st century all-engulfing counterparts. Why do you not read the words he has written in response to your assertion ? :s
-
David Cameron: The best Prime Minister money can buy.
Thanks for that. I didn't realise that was the reason he won. Silly me thought it was because he leads a party that knows how to generate 1000 new jobs every day when in power. I didn't realise Labour lost because they always increase unemployment and leave the economy in a mess every time they have a period in office.
You live and learn.
Yet again Mick makes a prize pillock of himself by not reading what someone else has written (or deliberately distorting it for his own pathetic attempts to be contrary).
I did not say the election has been bought: I said David Cameron has.
Excuse me. Far from being a prize pillock I have enhanced my already excellent reputation. May I remind you that I was the only one who predicted a Tory majority. I made this prediction when Labour were miles ahead in the polls more than a year ago. I was ridiculed for it. Not any more.
Who was the one who predicted deflation more than a year ago? That's right it was me.
Who predicted 2 out of the first 6 in the Grand National? Yes that was me again.
Here's another couple of predictions for you. Labour will not win either of the next 2 elections. Within 10 years, UKIP will have replaced them as the main opposition to the Tories.
Get in.
You really just can't help it, can you?
-
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
Have you been asleep for the past 25 years? The Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. Since then Russia with it's oligarchs and Putin's dictatorial rule, is proving to be the atypical right-wing fascist state you aspire for us!
I'm sorry you've lost me there (not for the first time). Where have I ever said I want us to be like Russia? Evidence man. Where is it?
What about China? I notice you don't disagree with me on that one. At last we've found something we agree on.
Get in.
That's the same for all parties after an election. Labour have gained 30,000 new members since the defeat.
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
Have you been asleep for the past 25 years? The Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. Since then Russia with it's oligarchs and Putin's dictatorial rule, is proving to be the atypical right-wing fascist state you aspire for us!
I'm sorry you've lost me there (not for the first time). Where have I ever said I want us to be like Russia? Evidence man. Where is it?
What about China? I notice you don't disagree with me on that one. At last we've found something we agree on.
Get in.
Mick, Russia and China certainly don't operate anywhere near the same way as our left of centre Labour party.
Russia is run by right wing mobsters and fascists and well China seems to have embraced a sort of capitalism. In that Billy was correct ; you asserted that the lefties as you put it had more in common with Russia and China. That is far from the case and never has the Labour party in this country worked like the Soviet/Russian fascists nor the Chinese post Mao and their 21st century all-engulfing counterparts. Why do you not read the words he has written in response to your assertion ? :s
I beg to differ. Left unchecked Labour hardcore lefties would love the country to be run like China. In China the government manages and controls the economy. Many of the domestic companies are owned and run by the government. Recently, the Chinese economy has become more geared towards capitalism, but is still officially socialist.
Russia is more of a mixed bag these days but until relatively recently they operated pretty much like China.
Both countries have at long last realised that capitalism is the way forward. They both have a very long way to go just like the Labour party.
Countries that are communist (like China) consider themselves to be socialist. Russia is now a semi-presidential country which is still trying to shake off the many socialist shackles inherited from the recent past when it was part of the Soviet Union.
To prove the point here is a list of all the countries that claim to be socialist. Communist China leads the way. It is interesting to note that socialist countries only start doing better for themselves when they embrace capitalism. Labour need to learn this lesson and dump the toxic socialist brand if they ever want to be taken seriously again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
We'll soon know the fate of the Labour party. If they elect one of the old socialist guard such as Yvette (sour-faced) Cooper or Andy (lack of personality) Burnham they are finished.
I don't think they realise how close they are to being wiped out. Scotland should be a stark reminder as to how quickly things can change. They've not just got the Tories to worry about. UKIP are making huge inroads into their support and they better do something pretty damn quick to reverse this trend or they've had it.
I don't think they are capable of turning it around and fully expect UKIP to replace them as the main opposition within the next 10 years.
Get in.
-
I was going to say 'sadly, I saw Mick's post above' quoted in Glyn's post, but actually, it's given me the biggest laugh I've had this month so far. UKIP will become the main opposition party within 10 years? Lol. I think you need to go back to school Mick. Single issue parties and movements prosper on, er, single issues. Oh, and don't you remember the last 'new' political party, that was also going to break the mould of British politics and set us all on a new direction? Best get your history book out again Mick. It's an instructive reference point. Mind you, the lesson will, no doubt, pass you by as usual.
BobG
-
I was going to say 'sadly, I saw Mick's post above' quoted in Glyn's post, but actually, it's given me the biggest laugh I've had this month so far. UKIP will become the main opposition party within 10 years? Lol. I think you need to go back to school Mick. Single issue parties and movements prosper on, er, single issues. Oh, and don't you remember the last 'new' political party, that was also going to break the mould of British politics and set us all on a new direction? Best get your history book out again Mick. It's an instructive reference point. Mind you, the lesson will, no doubt, pass you by as usual.
BobG
You are typical of the complacency that bedevils the Labour party. You claim to know your history. What a laugh. You completely ignore recent history. What has happened to Labour in Scotland in the last 5 years? They've been wiped out by a nationalist party. What type of party are UKIP? They are mainly English nationalists.
It beggars belief that you lefties can't see the writing is on the wall. Unless Labour move to the right they are finished. They are already finished in Scotland and they've managed that in less than 5 years. I'm being very generous saying the same thing will happen in England in 10 years. I wouldn't be surprised if it happened in 5 years. May I remind you of my excellent predictive powers.
Labour's only hope of moving forward is if they elect Chuka Umuna and he is able to move the party to the right. Andy Burnham his main rival would be a disaster.
Lets hope Burnham wins.
IC1967
-
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
Have you been asleep for the past 25 years? The Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. Since then Russia with it's oligarchs and Putin's dictatorial rule, is proving to be the atypical right-wing fascist state you aspire for us!
I'm sorry you've lost me there (not for the first time). Where have I ever said I want us to be like Russia? Evidence man. Where is it?
What about China? I notice you don't disagree with me on that one. At last we've found something we agree on.
Get in.
That's the same for all parties after an election. Labour have gained 30,000 new members since the defeat.
I'd much rather America was the main power in the world than the alternative Russia or China. Then again I can see why lefties have a different view. Russia and China operate much more in line with their political outlook.
America has faults (far too many people believe in God for one) but on the whole it does try to be a force for good. I doubt you'd be able to say the same of Russia and China if one of them ever becomes the world's premier power. The day may come soon as China continues to power ahead at a rapid rate of knots. When it does, you lefties will be left ruing the day.
Sandy ignore daft Bob. Most of us Brits love your country.
Long live America!!!
Have you been asleep for the past 25 years? The Berlin Wall came down in 1989 and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991. Since then Russia with it's oligarchs and Putin's dictatorial rule, is proving to be the atypical right-wing fascist state you aspire for us!
I'm sorry you've lost me there (not for the first time). Where have I ever said I want us to be like Russia? Evidence man. Where is it?
What about China? I notice you don't disagree with me on that one. At last we've found something we agree on.
Get in.
Mick, Russia and China certainly don't operate anywhere near the same way as our left of centre Labour party.
Russia is run by right wing mobsters and fascists and well China seems to have embraced a sort of capitalism. In that Billy was correct ; you asserted that the lefties as you put it had more in common with Russia and China. That is far from the case and never has the Labour party in this country worked like the Soviet/Russian fascists nor the Chinese post Mao and their 21st century all-engulfing counterparts. Why do you not read the words he has written in response to your assertion ? :s
I beg to differ. Left unchecked Labour hardcore lefties would love the country to be run like China. In China the government manages and controls the economy. Many of the domestic companies are owned and run by the government. Recently, the Chinese economy has become more geared towards capitalism, but is still officially socialist.
Russia is more of a mixed bag these days but until relatively recently they operated pretty much like China.
Both countries have at long last realised that capitalism is the way forward. They both have a very long way to go just like the Labour party.
Countries that are communist (like China) consider themselves to be socialist. Russia is now a semi-presidential country which is still trying to shake off the many socialist shackles inherited from the recent past when it was part of the Soviet Union.
To prove the point here is a list of all the countries that claim to be socialist. Communist China leads the way. It is interesting to note that socialist countries only start doing better for themselves when they embrace capitalism. Labour need to learn this lesson and dump the toxic socialist brand if they ever want to be taken seriously again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
We'll soon know the fate of the Labour party. If they elect one of the old socialist guard such as Yvette (sour-faced) Cooper or Andy (lack of personality) Burnham they are finished.
I don't think they realise how close they are to being wiped out. Scotland should be a stark reminder as to how quickly things can change. They've not just got the Tories to worry about. UKIP are making huge inroads into their support and they better do something pretty damn quick to reverse this trend or they've had it.
I don't think they are capable of turning it around and fully expect UKIP to replace them as the main opposition within the next 10 years.
Get in.
What a load of rubbish. Do you actually know what socialism is or do you just look it up on Wikipedia?
So is Russia a country that operates in line with a leftie political outlook or not then?
-
Look it's very simple. Socialism is only one small step from communism. Many of the people in Labour have more in common with communism than they do capitalism.
That is their fundamental problem and is why they will be finished soon if they don't make a radical change in their philosophy.
-
And right-wing politics is only one small step from fascism - and some people say that many people involved in the Conservatives and UKIP are the wrong side of that line.
Wrong again, I suggest you go do a bit more research on Wikipedia before attempting to debate with me as all you do is make yourself look a fool, socialism is a democratic political ideology - communism rejects democracy for armed force.
About the answer to my previous question....again...
-
And right-wing politics is only one small step from fascism - and some people say that many people involved in the Conservatives and UKIP are the wrong side of that line.
Wrong again, I suggest you go do a bit more research on Wikipedia before attempting to debate with me as all you do is make yourself look a fool, socialism is a democratic political ideology - communism rejects democracy for armed force.
About the answer to my previous question....again...
Look. I only answer questions if they are not silly.
How do you reconcile your silly definition of socialism and communism with the fact that China And Vietnam both declare themselves as socialist and are run by communist parties? Indeed Vietnam likes to be known as the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.
Now unlike you my questions are not silly. However given your past track record I won't be holding my breath for an answer.
-
I was going to say 'sadly, I saw Mick's post above' quoted in Glyn's post, but actually, it's given me the biggest laugh I've had this month so far. UKIP will become the main opposition party within 10 years? Lol. I think you need to go back to school Mick. Single issue parties and movements prosper on, er, single issues. Oh, and don't you remember the last 'new' political party, that was also going to break the mould of British politics and set us all on a new direction? Best get your history book out again Mick. It's an instructive reference point. Mind you, the lesson will, no doubt, pass you by as usual.
BobG
You are typical of the complacency that bedevils the Labour party. You claim to know your history. What a laugh. You completely ignore recent history. What has happened to Labour in Scotland in the last 5 years? They've been wiped out by a nationalist party. What type of party are UKIP? They are mainly English nationalists.
It beggars belief that you lefties can't see the writing is on the wall. Unless Labour move to the right they are finished. They are already finished in Scotland and they've managed that in less than 5 years. I'm being very generous saying the same thing will happen in England in 10 years. I wouldn't be surprised if it happened in 5 years. May I remind you of my excellent predictive powers.
Labour's only hope of moving forward is if they elect Chuka Umuna and he is able to move the party to the right. Andy Burnham his main rival would be a disaster.
Lets hope Burnham wins.
IC1967
I wouldn't write Burnham off, he's a decent bloke who I think is quite a centrist. Umunna, is an Obamma clone and I think he could easily be seen as too metropolitan and too slick.
For me the Labour Party have got to convince Dan Jarvis that now is the time and he's got to take the opportunity.
-
Good grief, you really dont know anything about world politics do you. As I wrote previously, socialism is a democratic political ideology - communism is the imposition of that ideology by force. China and Vietnam being perfect examples of that, both of them having civil wars for years that the Communists eventually won.
What is silly about the question; is Russia a country that operates in line with a leftie political outlook or not? Seems a simple and straight forward question to me.
-
Interestingly Farage has just said this minute on QT that Dan Jarvis is the candidate Conservatives would fear.
-
Good grief, you really dont know anything about world politics do you. As I wrote previously, socialism is a democratic political ideology - communism is the imposition of that ideology by force. China and Vietnam being perfect examples of that, both of them having civil wars for years that the Communists eventually won.
What is silly about the question; is Russia a country that operates in line with a leftie political outlook or not? Seems a simple and straight forward question to me.
Your definitions are a load of old cock. When I've got a bit more time I'll post the proper definitions so people can see how similar both are. I repeat, I don't answer silly questions.
-
Good grief, you really dont know anything about world politics do you. As I wrote previously, socialism is a democratic political ideology - communism is the imposition of that ideology by force. China and Vietnam being perfect examples of that, both of them having civil wars for years that the Communists eventually won.
What is silly about the question; is Russia a country that operates in line with a leftie political outlook or not? Seems a simple and straight forward question to me.
Your definitions are a load of old cock. When I've got a bit more time I'll post the proper definitions so people can see how similar both are. I repeat, I don't answer silly questions.
Loosely speaking wilts has already done that . whatever any of our political persuasions those remain the basic interpretations of each system.
Please don't bore the pants of us all with more plagiarised quotes purporting to be your own work ....it's boring the pants of us and is highly insulting. Most of the forum members that allow you to debate with them are both educated and have been taught how to use search engines for information.
Back off occasionally Mick ; if your counter-argument is wrong then hold your hands up. We won't shoot you ffs !
-
Good grief, you really dont know anything about world politics do you. As I wrote previously, socialism is a democratic political ideology - communism is the imposition of that ideology by force. China and Vietnam being perfect examples of that, both of them having civil wars for years that the Communists eventually won.
What is silly about the question; is Russia a country that operates in line with a leftie political outlook or not? Seems a simple and straight forward question to me.
Your definitions are a load of old cock. When I've got a bit more time I'll post the proper definitions so people can see how similar both are. I repeat, I don't answer silly questions.
Right it's time to show how ludicrous your definitions are. Here are the proper definitions:
Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.
Communism is a social and economic system in which all property and means of production is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs.
So as any right-minded person can see, both ideologies are very similar.
Now get an abject apology sorted for trying to deceive people. Get on with it man.
-
He's never responded to reason Hools. I tried that more than once. It's a shame, but there's no escaping the fact that he's our Resident Idiot.
BobG
-
Let me guess.
Another thread on a specific topic has spiralled into a a set of masturbatory pronouncements from the Micktionary and Mickipedia?
Is that about right?
-
Good grief, you really dont know anything about world politics do you. As I wrote previously, socialism is a democratic political ideology - communism is the imposition of that ideology by force. China and Vietnam being perfect examples of that, both of them having civil wars for years that the Communists eventually won.
What is silly about the question; is Russia a country that operates in line with a leftie political outlook or not? Seems a simple and straight forward question to me.
I've highlighted the bit in bold that is so ridiculous it isn't true.
How on earth can a democratic political ideology be imposed by force? You really have come up with the most stupid statement I've ever read on this forum (and believe me there are plenty to choose from).
Just admit you haven't got a clue what you're talking about (unlike me). Get an abject apology sorted and we'll say no more about the matter.
Come on man. Get on with it. You know you should.
-
He's never responded to reason Hools. I tried that more than once. It's a shame, but there's no escaping the fact that he's our Resident Idiot.
BobG
Look daft Bob. Over the last few days you managed to stop insulting me. You are now showing signs of resuming where you left off when we were all fearing for your mental health. Just ignore me. It's not easy for you (and Billy) to come to terms with the fact that you have met your intellectual superior. Get over it. I'm sure there must be someone out there that is intellectually superior to me but I haven't come across them yet.
When I do I will admit it. I can't say fairer than that.
IC1967
-
Let me guess.
Another thread on a specific topic has spiralled into a a set of masturbatory pronouncements from the Micktionary and Mickipedia?
Is that about right?
Look. You're starting to display the same homo erotic tendencies that daft Bob was recently displaying. Luckily for you both we have a society that is far more tolerant of your sexual preferences. I just wish you wouldn't abuse this tolerance by shoving it in the faces of those of us that are straight.
-
He's never responded to reason Hools. I tried that more than once. It's a shame, but there's no escaping the fact that he's our Resident Idiot.
BobG
Shame is Bob that
he hijacks good topics and basically wrecks them with in his own self- opinionated manner. If only he would try to debate without his old buddy ( Wikipedia ) ; we could get our teeth into proper debates.
Mick , please think and read the posts that other forum users write. I am sure that you can but have come to the conclusion that you are completely delusional - stop taking those drugs and listen (read) what others have to say. It will stop you looking a right cock in future.
Final point , realise there are "grey" areas in life, overlaps if you like ; far more "grey" than black or white . That's why we have a forum !
-
Hoola.
You're an admirable liberal mate, but sometimes the "let's all be friends and act like grown ups" approach doesn't have the traction that you might hope it would.
-
Interestingly Farage has just said this minute on QT that Dan Jarvis is the candidate Conservatives would fear.
There's a lot about Jarvis that reminds me of a young Tony Blair. He probably needs to get a serious Shadow job under his belt though. If you recall Blair made a big impact as Shadow Home Sec.
-
Hoola.
You're an admirable liberal mate, but sometimes the "let's all be friends and act like grown ups" approach doesn't have the traction that you might hope it would.
I will take that as a compliment Billy although even Liberals tire of listening to diatribes from the likes of Mick.
Just think of the great movers and shakers from what is a fantastic Whig/Liberal history. We had proper Prime Ministers .....Peel, Palmerston, Asquith, Gladstone, Lloyd - George, Churchill and many more. Proper Parliamentarians who protected the people from the Conservatives. These weren't just limp-wristed folk they were modernisers of their age , leaders with charisma. What do we have now ... shite, the people we have now are frightened of their own shadow.
Cameron, Miliband, Clegg and Garage would never have had the attributes to climb to the top in those days .
We need to be inspired left , centre or bloody right but its just not there in our faux leaders :(
Anyway rant over, 'bout Mick and his w**kfest over Garage and Cameron. It's no surprise that they can be thought of together is it ?
-
Hoola
It's the downside of democracy. Successful leaders today have to be adept at LOOKING in control and giving a message that sounds believable, whilst also finding time to play with their kids and smile for the cameras, and to be able to eat bacon sandwiches without looking like a social misfit. It's not about proper leadership and proper detailed thinking. It's about the appearance of leadership and being able to sell a line.
Whilst the idea of holding leaders to account is fine in principle, I think our society and media have gone way off the end of the scale on this. We scrutinise every word, every slip, every non-verbal communication nuance and as a result, we naturally get politicians who have to play that game. Personally, I think the whole satire industry, starting with That Was The Week That Was in the 60s and accelerating from there has been deeply corrosive. It's led us into a "politics as spectator sport" environment, where even the "serious" commentators (Paxman, Humphries) see there job as being to entertain viewers by trying to trip politicians up, instead of trying to help educate the public by really getting into details and policies. You need to have a system that pricks and deflates politicians, but not a system that ONLY does that.
As I've said times many, Churchill would be kebabbed these days. A depressive alcoholic with a face like a smacked arse who didn't even know which way round to stick his fingers up in a Victory sign. He wouldn't get within a hundred miles of No10 these days. He'd be a figure of derision.
-
TRB
I agree. Any candidate as a potential PM should have served time learning the ropes in senior roles beforehand.
But it didn't do Cameron any harm. His track record before taking over as Leader of the Opposition was a few years as a Conservative party research and SpAd, 2 years as a backbencher, 2 years as a VERY junior shadow minister and 6 months as Shadow Business Secretary. Quite barmy that we expect people with such a sparse track record to lead the country.
-
Hoola.
You're an admirable liberal mate, but sometimes the "let's all be friends and act like grown ups" approach doesn't have the traction that you might hope it would.
I will take that as a compliment Billy although even Liberals tire of listening to diatribes from the likes of Mick.
Just think of the great movers and shakers from what is a fantastic Whig/Liberal history. We had proper Prime Ministers .....Peel, Palmerston, Asquith, Gladstone, Lloyd - George, Churchill and many more. Proper Parliamentarians who protected the people from the Conservatives. These weren't just limp-wristed folk they were modernisers of their age , leaders with charisma. What do we have now ... shite, the people we have now are frightened of their own shadow.
Cameron, Miliband, Clegg and Garage would never have had the attributes to climb to the top in those days .
We need to be inspired left , centre or bloody right but its just not there in our faux leaders :(
Anyway rant over, 'bout Mick and his w**kfest over Garage and Cameron. It's no surprise that they can be thought of together is it ?
Another one with homo erotic tendencies.
-
Good grief, you really dont know anything about world politics do you. As I wrote previously, socialism is a democratic political ideology - communism is the imposition of that ideology by force. China and Vietnam being perfect examples of that, both of them having civil wars for years that the Communists eventually won.
What is silly about the question; is Russia a country that operates in line with a leftie political outlook or not? Seems a simple and straight forward question to me.
Your definitions are a load of old cock. When I've got a bit more time I'll post the proper definitions so people can see how similar both are. I repeat, I don't answer silly questions.
Right it's time to show how ludicrous your definitions are. Here are the proper definitions:
Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.
Communism is a social and economic system in which all property and means of production is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs.
So as any right-minded person can see, both ideologies are very similar.
Now get an abject apology sorted for trying to deceive people. Get on with it man.
Is that it! Is that your definition of socialism and communism!!! If you are being serious that is certainly one of, if not the most ludicrous posts on here.
What about this:
The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win
and this
a condition of society in which there should be neither rich nor poor, neither master nor master's man, neither idle nor overworked, neither brainslack brain workers, nor heartsick hand workers, in a word, in which all men would be living in equality of condition, and would manage their affairs unwastefully, and with the full consciousness that harm to one would mean harm to all
or to plagerise another website listing the differences:
Philosophy
Communism
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Free-access to the articles of consumption is made possible by advances in technology that allow for super-abundance.
Socialism
From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution. Emphasis on profit being distributed among the society or workforce to complement individual wages/salaries.
Definition
Communism
International theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, with actual ownership ascribed to the community or state. Rejection of free markets and extreme distrust of Capitalism in any form.
Socialism
A theory or system of social organization based on the holding of most property in common, with actual ownership ascribed to the workers.
Ideas
Communism
All people are the same and therefore classes make no sense. The government should own all means of production and land and also everything else. People should work for the government and the collective output should be redistributed equally.
Socialism
All individuals should have access to basic articles of consumption and public goods to allow for self-actualization. Large-scale industries are collective efforts and thus the returns from these industries must benefit society as a whole.
Key elements
Communism
Centralized government, planned economy, dictatorship of the "proletariat", common ownership of the tools of production, no private property. equality between genders and all people, international focus. anti-democratic. One party system.
Socialism
Economic activity and production especially are adjusted by the State to meet human needs and economic demands. "Production for use": useful goods and services are produced specifically for their usefulness.
Economic System
Communism
The means of production are held in common, negating the concept of ownership in capital goods. Production is organized to provide for human needs directly without any use for money. Communism is predicated upon a condition of material abundance.
Socialism
The means of production are owned by public enterprises or cooperatives, and individuals are compensated based on the principle of individual contribution. Production may variously be coordinated through either economic planning or markets.
Political System
Communism
Usually takes the form of totalitarianism as Marx described in The Communist Manifesto. Cronyism common.
Socialism
Can coexist with different political systems. Most socialists advocate participatory democracy, some (Social Democrats) advocate parliamentary democracy, and Marxist-Leninists advocate "Democratic centralism."
Private Property
Communism
Abolished. The concept of property is negated and replaced with the concept of commons and ownership with "usership".
Socialism
Two kinds of property: Personal property, such as houses, clothing, etc. owned by the individual. Public property includes factories, and means of production owned by the State but with worker control.
Economic coordination
Communism
Economic planning coordinates all decisions regarding investment, production and resource allocation. Planning is done in terms of physical units instead of money.
Socialism
Planned-socialism relies principally on planning to determine investment and production decisions. Planning may be centralized or decentralized. Market-socialism relies on markets for allocating capital to different socially-owned enterprises.
Religion
Communism
Abolished - all religious and metaphysics is rejected.
Socialism
Freedom of religion, but usually promotes secularism.
Ownership structure
Communism
The means of production are commonly-owned, meaning no entity or individual owns productive property. Importance is ascribed to "usership" over "ownership".
Socialism
The means of production are socially-owned with the surplus value produced accruing to either all of society (in Public-ownership models) or to all the employee-members of the enterprise (in Cooperative-ownership models).
Social Structure
Communism
All class distinctions are eliminated.
Socialism
Class distinctions are diminished. Status derived more from political distinctions than class distinctions. Some mobility.
Free Choice
Communism
Either the collective "vote" or the state's rulers make economic and political decisions for everyone else.
Socialism
Religion, jobs, & marriage are up to the individual. Compulsory education. Free, equal access to healthcare & education provided through a socialized system funded by taxation. Production decisions driven more by State decision than consumer demand.
Way of Change
Communism
Government in a Communist-state is the agent of change rather than any market or desire on the part of consumers. Change by government can be swift or slow, depending on change in ideology or even whim.
Socialism
Workers in a socialist state are the nominal agent of change rather than any market or desire on the part of consumers. Change by the State on behalf of workers can be swift or slow, depending on change in ideology or even whim.
Discrimination
Communism
In theory, all members of the state are considered equal.
Socialism
The people are considered equal; laws are made when necessary to protect people from discrimination. Immigration is often tightly controlled.
I shall now expect two apologies from you, one for the slur of my character and the other for your complete lack of knowledge.
-
:zzz:
-
Anything longer or more detailed than an aphoristic soundbite and Mick instantly switches off I'm afraid. You can tell by the quality of the websites he plunders.
-
:zzz:
-
:zzz:
For someone who doesnt know the difference between the political philosophies of Karl Marx and William Morris that's one of your more intelligent posts. I suggest you keep to a similar level in future.
-
:suicide:
-
:suicide: :scarf: :suicide:
:suicide:
The ideology of UKIP is ,......... :suicide: presumably.
-
:suicide:
No need to take it that seriously Mick, just because you have been shown to be foolish and defeated in an argument by me...again...I don't expect you to top yourself. An apology is all that is required.
-
:crying:
:suicide:
No need to take it that seriously Mick, just because you have been shown to be foolish and defeated in an argument by me...again...I don't expect you to top yourself. An apology is all that is required.
:crying: :headbang: :suicide:
-
I do believe Mick's getting more and more coherent the more and more he stops using words.
-
I agree Glyn, the standard of debate has certainly increased - as has his level of accuracy and honesty...
-
Oh come, come Wilts! Mick topping himslef would be the highlight of the decade never mind just this year!
In all my years I've never come across anyone as bigotted, short sighted and dim as this bloke blowing in the wind. Mick: he really is our Resident Idiot now.
BobG
-
I'm sure that if we started to write in hieroglyphics to humour Mick ; he would instantly profess to speak and write in Linear A !
-
Oh come, come Wilts! Mick topping himslef would be the highlight of the decade never mind just this year!
In all my years I've never come across anyone as bigotted, short sighted and dim as this bloke blowing in the wind. Mick: he really is our Resident Idiot now.
BobG
That's better daft Bob. You've finally managed to refrain from homo eroticism.
:thumbsup:
IC1967
-
I can't agree Bob, I might not like what Mick has to say - but I defend his right to be able to say it. That's socialism for you.
-
Wilts.
Agreed. Even better if you defend his right to spout b*llocks and just put him on IGNORE though.
-
Me? I'm an intellectual fascist me! Only folk with brains are allowed to speak :) They can disagree with me. they can defend the indefensible.But they have to do it with intelligence. Intelligence, evidence andf logic. Not b*llocks. No bugger has the right to spout b*llocks and expect to be treated seriously.
BobG
-
For Christ's sake guys, you are all more intelligent than him yet every one of you have fallen into his trap... the whole of this page is you lot talking only about Mick, can't you see that is all he comes on here for! I realise I have the right to put him on ignore but there are some important topics debated on here constantly spoiled by the resident idiot when, if you lot stopped feeding the troll he'd eff off and go spoil somebody else's forum.
Please! Please! Please!, EVERYONE just stop responding to him, you must all know by now it is totally futile trying to enlighten him so what is the point?
-
As the man said....
-
Twice, it seems. lol