Politics

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3809]

Poor Goldsmith.

 

If he fell into a bucket of tits he'd come out sucking his thumb.

[Dr Gloom 21802]

Very strong article from the Guardian. I'm surprised they published it to be honest, it cuts to the heart of their whole ideology and rips it out.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/01/blame-trump-brexit-identity-liberalism#comment-88592983

You really don't understand how newspapers work, do you?

[Dr Gloom 21802]

I've read a few denials of this thinking before this article but it's spot on.

 

The NE is full of people who care a lot more about shit jobs and shit wages than about feminism or whether gays can marry. That doesn't mean they are misogynists or dislike gays and don't think rights are good, they just care more about things that affect them directly.

 

Shit like Corbyn not singing the national anthem and trident renewal (see Renton) also influences these voters and failing to recognise it at least is very short sighted.

Yes, it's exactly why corbyn is unelectable. He doesn't speak to the blue collar vote ... at all. Despite speaking in their interests more than any other political leader, he does too much other stuff that will turn them off.

 

Conversely, it's exactly how trump was able to win the White House - he won over the traditional democrat white working class vote.

 

These aren't all bigots or misogynists or morons (though clearly there are a few of those in the mix too). They're basically poor people with shite jobs/lives and they finally found a leader who they thought spoke to their interests so they chose to ignore the toxic stuff and the lies.

 

Whether he acts in their interests is another matter.

Edited December 2, 2016 by Dr Gloom

[Rayvin 5164]

You really don't understand how newspapers work, do you?

If a newspaper publishes a disproportionate number of opinion articles on a specific theme, are you suggesting that said newspaper has no agenda or overriding belief system? The Guardian itself admits it does ffs.

[Rayvin 5164]

Yes, it's exactly why corbyn is unelectable. He doesn't speak to the blue collar vote ... at all. Despite speaking in their interests more than any other political leader, he does too much other stuff that will turn them off.

 

Conversely, it's exactly how trump was able to win the White House - he won over the traditional democrat white working class vote.

 

These aren't all bigots or misogynists or morons (though clearly there are a few of those in the mix too). They're basically poor people with shite jobs/lives and they finally found a leader who they thought spoke to their interests so they chose to ignore the toxic stuff and the lies.

 

Whether he acts in their interests is another matter.

Trump did get a swing from the working class but he still had less than 50% of them iirc. He actually had fairly wide reaching support through a few groups. Edited December 2, 2016 by Rayvin

[NJS 4365]

There's a lot of traction in the idea of two labour tribes - the metropolitan elite probably combined with immigrants in London and the other being the clichéd NE type working class.

 

Some would suggest two parties along those lines with a possible alliance but it's hard to see where leadership of either one would come from.

 

However I don't think this ukip scouse cunt will be the game changer in the north some are predicting.

[Dr Gloom 21802]

If a newspaper publishes a disproportionate number of opinion articles on a specific theme, are you suggesting that said newspaper has no agenda or overriding belief system? The Guardian itself admits it does ffs.

 

you're confusing leaders with opinion pieces. i'm saying it should be no surprise that the guardian publishes opinion pieces or columns that contradict its editorial line. it has done for years. jenkins used to write for the times and the standard - two papers you you wouldn't say are aligned with the guardian's agenda or belief system.

 

the guardian has published numerous op-eds over the years from tory politicians, just as the times and torygraph have done with labour politicians etc etc. 

[Dr Gloom 21802]

Trump did get a swing from the working class but he still had less than 50% of them iirc. He actually had fairly wide reaching support through a few groups.

 

without that vote, he wouldn't have won the rust belt states, which were crucial. 

[Rayvin 5164]

you're confusing leaders with opinion pieces. i'm saying it should be no surprise that the guardian publishes opinion pieces or columns that contradict its editorial line. it has done for years. jenkins used to write for the times and the standard - two papers you you wouldn't say are aligned with the guardian's agenda or belief system.

 

the guardian has published numerous op-eds over the years from tory politicians, just as the times and torygraph have done with labour politicians etc etc. 

 

I agree - but it hasn't published -this- article. This is a big deal. This is the first time I've seen them publish something that so directly cuts to the very heart of all they hold dear. The Guardian may now be starting to realise that identity isn't the be all and end all of leftwing politics.

 

I don't think they even would have considered publishing this a year ago.

 

EDIT - I've read their opinion articles almost every day for over a decade. I'm fairly up to speed with what they think...

Edited December 2, 2016 by Rayvin

[toonotl 2948]

Biggest Psy Ops of all time. To factionalise and fracture identity. To distract the left from its core paradigm the fair and equitable distribution of wealth and oppurtunity. It's the only reason the left should exist....

 

Like the elite give a flying fuck about blacks, women or gays....No it was all about displacement...Who are you? And how are you going to fight back?

 

Identity politics was all about sowing mistrust and creating a refracted image of society one that can never be pinned down...One that de-weaponized us and our old core groupings of fraternity and fair play.

 

If you and your community don't really know who you are (under the myriad of new labels) how do you fight back?

 

What's happennd with Trump and Brexit is the rolling back to a default setting.

 

Brace for impact.

Good post, Parky. I think you raise some good points in regards to identity politics isolating people rather than bringing us together.

 

However, as a conspiracy guy, how can say simultaneously that the system is rigged to stop us from fighting back, but that we are fighting back through the likes of Brexit and Trump?

 

To me, if the systems controlled then it's controlled. The argument seems inconsistent. Either we're powerless and the system is rigged or it's not and we aren't.

 

It seems like conspiracy theorists explain every misstep of the 'globalists' as the result of their stupidity, yet, at the same time, if the globalists are in charge, they must be pulling so many strings that it'd make god's creation of the universe look like child's play and we'd be powerless to resist.

 

Something that's always confused me.

[Dr Gloom 21802]

I agree - but it hasn't published -this- article. This is a big deal. This is the first time I've seen them publish something that so directly cuts to the very heart of all they hold dear. The Guardian may now be starting to realise that identity isn't the be all and end all of leftwing politics.

 

I don't think they even would have considered publishing this a year ago.

 

EDIT - I've read their opinion articles almost every day for over a decade. I'm fairly up to speed with what they think...

 

opinion pieces aren't the official voice of the paper though, that's the point. while most papers publish more op-eds that fit within their editoiral line than not, these pages are used to put across a range of views - eg jenkins having a column in the guardian, or the same paper publishing op-eds by the likes of michael gove etc.

 

you'll find the editorial agenda of a newspaper in the leader column. 

[Rayvin 5164]

opinion pieces aren't the official voice of the paper though, that's the point. while most papers publish more op-eds that fit within their editoiral line than not, these pages are used to put across a range of views - eg jenkins having a column in the guardian, or the same paper publishing op-eds by the likes of michael gove etc.

 

you'll find the editorial agenda of a newspaper in the leader column. 

 

So you're saying that the Guardian publishing the overwhelming number of opinion articles that it does on a particular theme, is something we should consider to be of no merit in terms of inferring the newspaper's worldview? Because occasionally they publish a single article by a Tory? Did you see how many anti-Trump articles they published after his election. It was 23. That day. 23 anti-Trump editorial pieces. And you don't think that's representative of a wider agenda? I'm not even disagreeing with that part of the agenda, but I think we have to acknowledge it!

 

I think we're always going to disagree on this one mate. I can respect your view as a journalist but I think you have a slightly purist view of how these things operate. For instance, would you say that the Daily Mail doesn't use editorials to put across its agenda? It's all about competing narratives these days IMO.

[Dr Gloom 21802]

So you're saying that the Guardian publishing the overwhelming number of opinion articles that it does on a particular theme, is something we should consider to be of no merit in terms of inferring the newspaper's worldview? Because occasionally they publish a single article by a Tory? Did you see how many anti-Trump articles they published after his election. It was 23. That day. 23 anti-Trump editorial pieces. And you don't think that's representative of a wider agenda? I'm not even disagreeing with that part of the agenda, but I think we have to acknowledge it!

 

I think we're always going to disagree on this one mate. I can respect your view as a journalist but I think you have a slightly purist view of how these things operate. For instance, would you say that the Daily Mail doesn't use editorials to put across its agenda? It's all about competing narratives these days IMO.

 

no, i'm not saying that. i'm replying to your point that you were surprised to see the guardian publish an opinion piece that didn't reflect its world view. while these pieces are in the the minority, they do happen. 

 

and again, you're getting your terminology wrong. an editorial is also known as the leader article or leader column. this is the official voice of the newspaper. op-eds (or opinion pieces), or columns tend to reflect the editorial line of a newspaper, but not always. most quality broadsheets will publish a range of views on these pages, within reason. i wouldn't expect the guardian to publish an op-ed by nigel farage, for example, but they do occasionally allow contributors to put right forward right wing arguments. 

[Dr Gloom 21802]

PS - everything the mail publishes is shaped by its vile agenda, but it isn't a quality paper. it's a tabloid rag, trying to disguise itself as a mid market outlet.

 

this is quite a tedious argument but i think you have to make the distinction between editorial and opinion.  

[Rayvin 5164]

no, i'm not saying that. i'm replying to your point that you were surprised to see the guardian publish an opinion piece that didn't reflect its world view. while these pieces are in the the minority, they do happen. 

 

and again, you're getting your terminology wrong. an editorial is also known as the leader article or leader column. this is the official voice of the newspaper. op-eds (or opinion pieces), or columns tend to reflect the editorial line of a newspaper, but not always. most quality broadsheets will publish a range of views on these pages, within reason. i wouldn't expect the guardian to publish an op-ed by nigel farage, for example, but they do occasionally allow contributors to put right forward right wing arguments. 

 

Ah ok, sorry - I better understand what you're saying now.

 

I do note that the Guardian on occasion put forward an opposing viewpoint, but as I say, I was very surprised to see this particular view. I've never seen them publish this one before. I guess I can see why you don't think this is a big deal, but for me this is on par with the Daily Mail writing an article suggesting that maybe immigrants aren't to blame after all.

[Dr Gloom 21802]

ha, that'll never happen. 

[Rayvin 5164]

ha, that'll never happen. 

 

Hence my surprise about this article!

 

This has restored my faith in the Guardian to a degree - credit where it's due.

[Dr Gloom 21802]

Interesting big read

 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/04/google-democracy-truth-internet-search-facebook

[ewerk 30221]

 

 

Those gloating fuckers.

[Alex 34787]

[Dr Gloom 21802]

their editors must realise the mail is a parody of itself. 

[Alex 34787]

Just reaffirming their long held support for fascism tbh.

[Anorthernsoul 1221]

[Dr Gloom 21802]

The state of this cunt's face

[Dr Gloom 21802]

And his voice for that matter