My point remains that I stated that I thought some of the responses were a little bored which I felt was unfair as a new poster should not be expected to be familiar with the arguments from a few pages back. I doubt this was deliberate but we're all human and it's important to repeatedly test my own assumptions.
And my point remains that this is not how @Bishops Finger appeared to read, or exploit, your post.
I see what you mean but there's still an unspoken assumption in your post that BF was in a bubble. I appreciate you meant specifically with respect to the sockpuppetry accusation
I meant specifically with respect to the sockpuppet accusation, and said so, and I stand by my claim that it's evidence of being in a bubble.
At least that's the more charitable explanation.
The charitable explanation is that this accusation is made in misguided good faith, in which case it's conclusive evidence to my mind of a conviction that only one, single, dishonest individual could possibly disagree with the accuser's viewpoint, which is beyond closed-minded.
The less charitable explanation is that the accusation of sockpuppetry is wholly gratuitous, and that explanation is worse.
Sorry no I disagree with some of this. BF did not suggest @yohan300 was a sock puppet but that he might be. It is more nuanced than you suggest. I would also disagree on closed minds. On here most people have reasons for saying what they do. Thought out reasons. Any opposing statement needs to be thought out too.
Ten of thousands of people have died from a virus, not from the government's actions.
You could argue that their failure to take specific actions has led to deaths, but that only holds water if some other government might have reasonably been expected to act differently.
Specifically we can look at the other countries in Europe which locked down sooner, and invested more heavily in their health services and have a lower per capita death rate.
There is no evidence Corbyn would have ignored advice and locked down sooner. Remember the reason for not locking down sooner was that scientists reckoned people wouldn't tolerate lockdown for too long, so wanted to bring it in as late as possible while ensuring the health service wasn't overwhelmed as happened in Italy.
This was evidence from behavioural "scientists" beloved of Cummings, and it is reasonable to assume it would not have been given such weight by a Labour-SNP coalition. Recall that Scotland shut down large gatherings before England, with Johnson giving some waffle claiming the Scottish NHS wasn't as robust. As for testing, it seems likely that a Corbyn government would have been far more willing to use the full power of the state to increase capacity, imposing demands on private industry where necessary. Likewise they'd have been more willing to ramp up domestic production of PPE.
On the other hand we could have been drowning in thousands of non-functional and unneeded ventilators made by a consortium of Network Rail and the Royal Mint at £50k a pop, with Corbyn determined to maintain production indefinitely by exporting them to developing countries.
Of course what has happened is that it's nearly June and they still haven't got a contact tracing system up and running, in part because rather than bolster the existing system for contact tracing run by LAs they decided to outsource the whole thing to Serco.
And this after 10 years in government, so what Doc said.
It's weird to see comment on what Corbyn might have done, when Boris is palpably out of his depth. Hasn't everything connected with the pandemic been late in the UK?
Perhaps @yohan300 works in insurance? Whenever you make a claim, someone is employed to try and dissuade you with specious alternatives ('the hotel seated you so close to a hot air vent it scorched your coat - but if they'd offered a cloakroom, it might have been stolen' is my favourite).
I'm still not getting an answer on how Conservative voters feel about Cummings as PM.
My point remains that I stated that I thought some of the responses were a little bored which I felt was unfair as a new poster should not be expected to be familiar with the arguments from a few pages back.
A significant flaw in your argument was assuming @yohan300 is a new poster. You may have noticed the recent Styx thread announcing that we've made which mean that the number of posts someone has made will be displayed by their name, until they have made more than 50 posts.
Yes, I'd originally thought that, but then noticed that there were no little numbers. A quick check of the profile showed a member since March 2018 (ie from the month of the new Ship and therefore possibly a transferee from the old) and at the time I checked posts in the low 50s.
So you agree that he’s bad, you just don’t think he’s as bad as someone else.
He was surely useful to the PM to get through the hung parliament thing and the election, but then I think some fresh faces were needed. I am sure there will be years worth of public inquiry to pontificate on exactly what influence he had on which particular decisions with regard to this pandemic.
I'm still not getting an answer on how Conservative voters feel about Cummings as PM.
You mean PM's advisor? He's got some way to go to top Alistair Campbell, whose dossier-altering antics led to hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Presumably relating to the build up to the Iraq war. I assume you are aware of the six (yes, six!) enquiries into those dossiers and surrounding 'antics' (if one wishes to use that word) all of which cleared him of any wrong doing.
And, of course, Campbell played a key role in the Good Friday Agreement, bringing an almost complete cessation of paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland. An agreement the current government is hell-bent on destroying to further their neo-fascist agenda to drag us out of the EU against our will. What comparable good has Cummings ever done?
I'm still not getting an answer on how Conservative voters feel about Cummings as PM.
You mean PM's advisor? He's got some way to go to top Alistair Campbell, whose dossier-altering antics led to hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Presumably relating to the build up to the Iraq war. I assume you are aware of the six (yes, six!) enquiries into those dossiers and surrounding 'antics' (if one wishes to use that word) all of which cleared him of any wrong doing.
And, of course, Campbell played a key role in the Good Friday Agreement, bringing an almost complete cessation of paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland. An agreement the current government is hell-bent on destroying to further their neo-fascist agenda to drag us out of the EU against our will. What comparable good has Cummings ever done?
"Neo-fascist"? I don't think it's worth replying to you on this subject, sorry.
I'm still not getting an answer on how Conservative voters feel about Cummings as PM.
You mean PM's advisor? He's got some way to go to top Alistair Campbell, whose dossier-altering antics led to hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Presumably relating to the build up to the Iraq war. I assume you are aware of the six (yes, six!) enquiries into those dossiers and surrounding 'antics' (if one wishes to use that word) all of which cleared him of any wrong doing.
And, of course, Campbell played a key role in the Good Friday Agreement, bringing an almost complete cessation of paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland. An agreement the current government is hell-bent on destroying to further their neo-fascist agenda to drag us out of the EU against our will. What comparable good has Cummings ever done?
"Neo-fascist"? I don't think it's worth replying to you on this subject, sorry.
Perhaps @yohan300 works in insurance? Whenever you make a claim, someone is employed to try and dissuade you with specious alternatives ('the hotel seated you so close to a hot air vent it scorched your coat - but if they'd offered a cloakroom, it might have been stolen' is my favourite).
I'm still not getting an answer on how Conservative voters feel about Cummings as PM.
Based on a random sample of what ones I know are sharing on FB, it really depends on the voter. Some of them have gone full "move on" and will not hear a word against either of them. Others aren't happy at all and want the unofficial PM sacked. They're not too impressed with the real one either.
Politico had a good round up of the thoughts of Brexiter commentators after that press conference:
"That was one of the worst press conferences I have ever seen,” LBC’s Iain Dale wrote last night. “I wanted to hide behind the couch … Seriously, what on earth was Boris Johnson thinking? … Jesus wept. Car crash doesn’t really cover it.”
TalkRADIO’s Julia Hartley-Brewer tweeted: “I will forever be grateful to Dom Cummings for delivering Brexit … But. No one is above the law. Especially during a pandemic. It’s too late for an apology now. He has to go.”
And my favourite from ConservativeHome founder Tim Montgomerie: “I’m really embarrassed to have ever backed Boris Johnson for high office.”.
"Neo-fascist"? I don't think it's worth replying to you on this subject, sorry.
Quack. If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck ... then maybe it is a duck.
Some common marks of fascism, which may sound familiar ...
Nationalism: especially when defined in terms of ethnicity and ancestry, denigrating the social benefit of immigrants ("hostile environment"), the maintenance of cultural national purity (eg: complaints about "too many Polish shops")
National self-determination: could be part of above, but the obvious parallels with Brexshit make it worthy of a point on it's own
A "survival of the fittest" pseudo-Darwinianism: denial of aid to those deemed "unworthy", including the disabled. 20th century fascists even went for euthanasia to help "nature" along in ridding the nation of the burden of caring for the disabled - currently it's done with establishing a welfare system that's impossible to access and even if you succeed pays far less than is needed.
Romanticism in relation to the past: emphasis on past national achievements, mythologising the past (we see a lot of that with VE Day celebrations, talk of Dunkirk or Blitz spirit etc)
Charismatic leadership: despite all his faults, Johnson is charismatic
Anti-communism: with the tirades against a mildly-left-wing politician like Jeremy Corbyn for being a "commie" (Stalinist, Trot or whatever other epithet people falsely apply) that looks quite obvious
Anti-democratic: happy to use democracy to attain power, but once achieved steadily erode the democratic functions to maintain power. That could include strange prorogations of Parliament, suppression of reports on anti-democratic interference, calling those who oppose the political dogma of the ruling party "enemies of the people", attempts to limit the powers of the courts ...
De Pfeffel was simply dreadful yesterday. He looked physically ill, tired - and coughed twice. I don’t think he should be back at work.
He certainly looked and sounded unwell. And as we know, many COVID-19 survivors are suffering quite serious long-term after-effects. I'm sure, however, he has good medical advisors keeping an eye on him.
Ref: Nicola Sturgeon is perhaps more of a controversial figure here in Scotland than might seem apparent elsewhere in the UK. I keep my head down when opinions start circulating from my FB friends! The Independence issue has deeply divided the country, and if some recent reports are right one or two wheels appear to be coming off the SNP wagon. I don't know enough about the intricacies of Hollyrood to have any firm opinion, myself.
So there's a strange dynamic of some people being vociferously anti-Boris Johnson and pro-Sturgeon; and others being vociferously anti- both of them, seeing them as being the same kind of leader with the same bag of dirty tricks.
Why are the Tories proving so incompetetent at handling the pandemic? Because nearly all the competent members of the government have been sacked at the behest of Cummings, or left in disgust at the conduct of the remainder.
De Pfeffel was simply dreadful yesterday. He looked physically ill, tired - and coughed twice. I don’t think he should be back at work.
He certainly looked and sounded unwell. And as we know, many COVID-19 survivors are suffering quite serious long-term after-effects. I'm sure, however, he has good medical advisors keeping an eye on him.
"Neo-fascist"? I don't think it's worth replying to you on this subject, sorry.
Quack. If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck ... then maybe it is a duck.
Some common marks of fascism, which may sound familiar ...
Nationalism: especially when defined in terms of ethnicity and ancestry, denigrating the social benefit of immigrants ("hostile environment"), the maintenance of cultural national purity (eg: complaints about "too many Polish shops")
National self-determination: could be part of above, but the obvious parallels with Brexshit make it worthy of a point on it's own
A "survival of the fittest" pseudo-Darwinianism: denial of aid to those deemed "unworthy", including the disabled. 20th century fascists even went for euthanasia to help "nature" along in ridding the nation of the burden of caring for the disabled - currently it's done with establishing a welfare system that's impossible to access and even if you succeed pays far less than is needed.
Romanticism in relation to the past: emphasis on past national achievements, mythologising the past (we see a lot of that with VE Day celebrations, talk of Dunkirk or Blitz spirit etc)
Charismatic leadership: despite all his faults, Johnson is charismatic
Anti-communism: with the tirades against a mildly-left-wing politician like Jeremy Corbyn for being a "commie" (Stalinist, Trot or whatever other epithet people falsely apply) that looks quite obvious
Anti-democratic: happy to use democracy to attain power, but once achieved steadily erode the democratic functions to maintain power. That could include strange prorogations of Parliament, suppression of reports on anti-democratic interference, calling those who oppose the political dogma of the ruling party "enemies of the people", attempts to limit the powers of the courts ...
Right click. View source. Scroll down until you find the text of the article. Copy and paste to text editor of your choice for easier reading. Most paywalls are susceptible to this.
They were the first right-wing publication to demand Cummings be sacked - now this. It reads exactly like the conversations Rev T and I have whenever Boris appears on TV. (Side question, why does the remote always jam whenever that happens?)
The complete work of fiction article Cummings and his wife wrote for them describing being ill with Covid-19 probably has nothing to do with it.
"Neo-fascist"? I don't think it's worth replying to you on this subject, sorry.
Quack. If it looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck ... then maybe it is a duck.
Some common marks of fascism, which may sound familiar ...
Nationalism: especially when defined in terms of ethnicity and ancestry, denigrating the social benefit of immigrants ("hostile environment"), the maintenance of cultural national purity (eg: complaints about "too many Polish shops")
National self-determination: could be part of above, but the obvious parallels with Brexshit make it worthy of a point on it's own
A "survival of the fittest" pseudo-Darwinianism: denial of aid to those deemed "unworthy", including the disabled. 20th century fascists even went for euthanasia to help "nature" along in ridding the nation of the burden of caring for the disabled - currently it's done with establishing a welfare system that's impossible to access and even if you succeed pays far less than is needed.
Romanticism in relation to the past: emphasis on past national achievements, mythologising the past (we see a lot of that with VE Day celebrations, talk of Dunkirk or Blitz spirit etc)
Charismatic leadership: despite all his faults, Johnson is charismatic
Anti-communism: with the tirades against a mildly-left-wing politician like Jeremy Corbyn for being a "commie" (Stalinist, Trot or whatever other epithet people falsely apply) that looks quite obvious
Anti-democratic: happy to use democracy to attain power, but once achieved steadily erode the democratic functions to maintain power. That could include strange prorogations of Parliament, suppression of reports on anti-democratic interference, calling those who oppose the political dogma of the ruling party "enemies of the people", attempts to limit the powers of the courts ...
@Alan Cresswell - this may have been said before, but would you be our Prime Minister, please? Pretty please?
(If the Kiwis won't lend us Jacinda, that is).
Jesus wept. This isn't even worthy of a refutation.
People who believe the current government are fascist belong in the same box as David Icke and the anti-Semitic lizard overlord fantasists.
The term used was Neo-Facist. As pointed out it is no different from claiming Corbyn is a communist. In all my years there has not been one Conservative government that has truly helped those who need it. Before he had to act on Covid Boris was heading the same way.
They were the first right-wing publication to demand Cummings be sacked - now this. It reads exactly like the conversations Rev T and I have whenever Boris appears on TV. (Side question, why does the remote always jam whenever that happens?)
The complete work of fiction article Cummings and his wife wrote for them describing being ill with Covid-19 probably has nothing to do with it.
I believe the relevant regulator is investigating it after receiving complaints from the public.
The term used was Neo-Facist. As pointed out it is no different from claiming Corbyn is a communist. In all my years there has not been one Conservative government that has truly helped those who need it. Before he had to act on Covid Boris was heading the same way.
Yeah the current government are just like the National Front aren't they.
Contact tracing already being described as shambolic, that's after testing and PPE being described like wise. Still, Boris says it will be world beating, I think he means the death rate.
The term used was Neo-Facist. As pointed out it is no different from claiming Corbyn is a communist. In all my years there has not been one Conservative government that has truly helped those who need it. Before he had to act on Covid Boris was heading the same way.
Yeah the current government are just like the National Front aren't they.
The term used was Neo-Facist. As pointed out it is no different from claiming Corbyn is a communist. In all my years there has not been one Conservative government that has truly helped those who need it. Before he had to act on Covid Boris was heading the same way.
Yeah the current government are just like the National Front aren't they.
Is there a :rolleyes: emoticon, or a :faceplam: one?
Yes, we definitely need a :facepalm:
If we just look at the Britannica.com summary, we have:
"Advocates extreme nationalism" - that covers Brexshit, which is ultimately just an extreme reaction to a perception that the nations of the UK are being swallowed into a greater Europe (which, they aren't, of course), taken to the extreme of coming out of the EU at massive economic and social costs.
"Attacks Marxism and other left wing ideologies" - the treatment given to moderate left-wing policies advocated by Jeremy Corbyn comes close to "attack", let alone the reaction to genuine far-left groups.
"Indulges in racist and xenophobic scapegoating" - the message from the Conservatives and other right wing parties and their media supporters for many years has been to promote a narrative that the economic problems of the UK are due to immigration, lots of crap about "immigrants taking your jobs" or "immigrant scroungers living off UK taxpayer funded benefits". We have a government that has for many years described their immigration policy as being to create a "hostile environment". And, even to the point where senior politicians can get away with inciting violence by comparing Muslim women to street furniture ("post boxes") and criminals ("bank robbers").
"Promotes populist right-wing economic programs" - of course, the Conservatives have always promoted right-wing economics. Recent years have seen an increase in populism within those programs (including, of course, Brexshit).
So, thanks for posting a link to the Britannica.com site which so clearly demonstrates my point.
By your logic Anglicans are Islamic fundamentalists because they believe in God, and are in favour of education for women and their participation in politics. Other defining characteristics can be ignored.
It is noticeable how groups like the BNP have all but disappeared since the tories started adopting their Islamophobia, anti-ziganism and so on.
But do go on, tell us how Corbyn is just like Stalin. We're waiting.
Allow me to quote Theresa May, the great neo-fascist dictator, who said in a dinner speech "The Death of Stalin depicts an ageing socialist demagogue who maintains his power through a sinister personality cult, rewriting history and crushing all internal dissent. I know we’re all very sorry that Jeremy Corbyn can’t be here tonight.”
It is noticeable how groups like the BNP have all but disappeared since the tories started adopting their Islamophobia, anti-ziganism and so on.
But do go on, tell us how Corbyn is just like Stalin. We're waiting.
Allow me to quote Theresa May, the great neo-fascist dictator, who said in a dinner speech "The Death of Stalin depicts an ageing socialist demagogue who maintains his power through a sinister personality cult, rewriting history and crushing all internal dissent. I know we’re all very sorry that Jeremy Corbyn can’t be here tonight.”
The lies of a failed PM are the best you can come up with?
By your logic Anglicans are Islamic fundamentalists because they believe in God, and are in favour of education for women and their participation in politics. Other defining characteristics can be ignored.
You'll have to spell that out a bit more, because I'm just not following.
You post a link to a summary of neo-fascism. I listed the characteristics in that description and indicated how the current and recent Conservative government and their media supporters meet those characteristics. Now, I agree that the list of neo-fascist characteristics isn't complete (for example: I'd probably add in something about propaganda, selective use of information that supports the ideology and dismissal of anything that doesn't as either "fake news" or simply ignored as irrelevant), and also that the characteristics of Conservative governments is longer than the few examples I gave. This is a post on a bulletin board, not a book.
In response you draw an analogy which compares three characteristics of Anglicanism with Islamic fundamentalism where only one of those characteristics are shared by both Anglicanism and Islam (belief in God - and, even then there'd be differences in how they describe God, Trinitarianism being fundamental to Anglicanism but anathema to Islam) as though this was in any way comparable or relevant to what I'd posted.
By your logic Anglicans are Islamic fundamentalists because they believe in God, and are in favour of education for women and their participation in politics. Other defining characteristics can be ignored.
You'll have to spell that out a bit more, because I'm just not following.
You post a link to a summary of neo-fascism. I listed the characteristics in that description and indicated how the current and recent Conservative government and their media supporters meet those characteristics. Now, I agree that the list of neo-fascist characteristics isn't complete (for example: I'd probably add in something about propaganda, selective use of information that supports the ideology and dismissal of anything that doesn't as either "fake news" or simply ignored as irrelevant), and also that the characteristics of Conservative governments is longer than the few examples I gave. This is a post on a bulletin board, not a book.
In response you draw an analogy which compares three characteristics of Anglicanism with Islamic fundamentalism where only one of those characteristics are shared by both Anglicanism and Islam (belief in God - and, even then there'd be differences in how they describe God, Trinitarianism being fundamental to Anglicanism but anathema to Islam) as though this was in any way comparable or relevant to what I'd posted.
Now, who needs to check their logic?
Ok, my question is, if you genuinely believe we living under the cosh of a fascist (or "neo-fascist") government why haven't you joined the armed struggle to free the country from such tyranny? Surely that's what most reasonable people would do? I would certainly do it, if it ever came to that. Could it be that you actually think we are living in a liberal democracy and that the current government, far from being fascist, is simply mildly right-wing, and that you're not best pleased with that?
By your logic Anglicans are Islamic fundamentalists because they believe in God, and are in favour of education for women and their participation in politics. Other defining characteristics can be ignored.
You'll have to spell that out a bit more, because I'm just not following.
You post a link to a summary of neo-fascism. I listed the characteristics in that description and indicated how the current and recent Conservative government and their media supporters meet those characteristics. Now, I agree that the list of neo-fascist characteristics isn't complete (for example: I'd probably add in something about propaganda, selective use of information that supports the ideology and dismissal of anything that doesn't as either "fake news" or simply ignored as irrelevant), and also that the characteristics of Conservative governments is longer than the few examples I gave. This is a post on a bulletin board, not a book.
In response you draw an analogy which compares three characteristics of Anglicanism with Islamic fundamentalism where only one of those characteristics are shared by both Anglicanism and Islam (belief in God - and, even then there'd be differences in how they describe God, Trinitarianism being fundamental to Anglicanism but anathema to Islam) as though this was in any way comparable or relevant to what I'd posted.
Now, who needs to check their logic?
Ok, my question is, if you genuinely believe we living under the cosh of a fascist (or "neo-fascist") government why haven't you joined the armed struggle to free the country from such tyranny? Surely that's what most reasonable people would do? I would certainly do it, if it ever came to that.
Because neo-fascism still operates within the sphere of democracy (much as old style Fascism started out in Germany and Italy in the early 1930s). While democracy is still functioning, most reasonable people would operate within the processes of democracy - badgering MPs, writing letters to newspapers or on social media, engage in sensible political discussion (where the other side behaves sensibly), campaign to highlight the problematic policies of the government, seek to encourage people to consider these problems when the next election comes around, stand for elected office and/or actively support those who do so in opposition to the parties you find objectionable, go to court to seek clarity on whether particular government policies are legal, do whatever you can to stand with those who are facing the impact of government policies (anything from donating to the local food bank to forming a human barrier to prevent the deportation of refugees who the government has decided are an "illegal immigrants") etc.
Armed struggle is the last resort when democracy has failed almost completely and other avenues of resistance are ineffective.
Ever wondered why 95% of Jews didn't vote for Labour in the last election? Was it because they were scared of Boris Johnson's fascism?
For a lot of people it's because they aren't socialists, and would never have voted Labour under any circumstance. For others, they might have been favourable towards Labour but other issues were more important (in Scotland, quite a few natural Labour supporters also support independence and so vote SNP, but in an independent Scotland will vote Labour again. Others thought that Labour were not sufficiently opposed to Brexshit ... or, not sufficiently supportive). Finally, the neo-fascism of the Conservatives is targeted towards scapegoating immigrants and muslims and doesn't present as anti-semitism so (for Jews) there wasn't much reason to be scared of Johnson - though, as human beings there would be if they ever needed access to benefits or wanted their children to grow up in a world where the air was breathable.
Ever wondered why 95% of Jews didn't vote for Labour in the last election? Was it because they were scared of Boris Johnson's fascism?
For a lot of people it's because they aren't socialists, and would never have voted Labour under any circumstance.
The large re-alignment of Jewish voters took place when Milliband was in charge of Labour - and at the time was reported to be due to his stance on the Israel/Palestine issue.
It's possible to pose a similar question over why only 16% of BAME voters vote Tory.
There's more than little of the Gish Gallop about @yohan300 . I'm still waiting for you to explain how we ended up with the worst per-capita death rate and third worst overall death till from Covid19. Perhaps you should deal with that first, rather than tell us that Theresa May thought Corbyn was a Stalinist.
There's more than little of the Gish Gallop about @yohan300 . I'm still waiting for you to explain how we ended up with the worst per-capita death rate and third worst overall death till from Covid19. Perhaps you should deal with that first, rather than tell us that Theresa May thought Corbyn was a Stalinist.
Why would I know that? It could be anything from Boris Johnson's deviousness through to the UK being a global hub through to Rich Tea biscuits making care home residents more susceptible to the virus.
As to Gish Gallop how is one lone person to put up a reasonable defence of a centre-right liberal Prime Minster on a thread infested with rabid socialists who have decided he is a fascist?
There's more than little of the Gish Gallop about @yohan300 . I'm still waiting for you to explain how we ended up with the worst per-capita death rate and third worst overall death till from Covid19. Perhaps you should deal with that first, rather than tell us that Theresa May thought Corbyn was a Stalinist.
Why would I know that? It could be anything from Boris Johnson's deviousness through to the UK being a global hub through to Rich Tea biscuits making care home residents more susceptible to the virus.
As to Gish Gallop how is one lone person to put up a reasonable defence of a centre-right liberal Prime Minster on a thread infested with rabid socialists who have decided he is a fascist?
When someone puts up a reasonable defence of a centre-right liberal PM we'll be sure to let you know. All we've got right now is someone attacking the former leader of the Labour party to distract from the nasty little shit currently squatting in Downing Street.
I'm waiting for some details about why Johnson is much worse than Theresa May, David Cameron, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, John Major and Margaret Thatcher. If indeed he is.
I suppose for some socialists, all the above will be equally as bad (or equally as fascist perhaps).
Comments
Sorry no I disagree with some of this. BF did not suggest @yohan300 was a sock puppet but that he might be. It is more nuanced than you suggest. I would also disagree on closed minds. On here most people have reasons for saying what they do. Thought out reasons. Any opposing statement needs to be thought out too.
Of course what has happened is that it's nearly June and they still haven't got a contact tracing system up and running, in part because rather than bolster the existing system for contact tracing run by LAs they decided to outsource the whole thing to Serco.
And this after 10 years in government, so what Doc said.
I'm still not getting an answer on how Conservative voters feel about Cummings as PM.
Yes, I'd originally thought that, but then noticed that there were no little numbers. A quick check of the profile showed a member since March 2018 (ie from the month of the new Ship and therefore possibly a transferee from the old) and at the time I checked posts in the low 50s.
You mean PM's advisor? He's got some way to go to top Alistair Campbell, whose dossier-altering antics led to hundreds of thousands of deaths.
He was surely useful to the PM to get through the hung parliament thing and the election, but then I think some fresh faces were needed. I am sure there will be years worth of public inquiry to pontificate on exactly what influence he had on which particular decisions with regard to this pandemic.
And, of course, Campbell played a key role in the Good Friday Agreement, bringing an almost complete cessation of paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland. An agreement the current government is hell-bent on destroying to further their neo-fascist agenda to drag us out of the EU against our will. What comparable good has Cummings ever done?
"Neo-fascist"? I don't think it's worth replying to you on this subject, sorry.
He waffled and prevaricated. He went into campaign mode about four times - when his questioners were chairs of select committees for goodness sake!
He was totally unclear - although he said ‘let me be clear’ several times.
"Stalinist" ? we may well say the same.
Yes this pandemic clearly doesn't play to his strengths. He'd rather be announcing infrastructure investment in the north.
Based on a random sample of what ones I know are sharing on FB, it really depends on the voter. Some of them have gone full "move on" and will not hear a word against either of them. Others aren't happy at all and want the unofficial PM sacked. They're not too impressed with the real one either.
Politico had a good round up of the thoughts of Brexiter commentators after that press conference:
"That was one of the worst press conferences I have ever seen,” LBC’s Iain Dale wrote last night. “I wanted to hide behind the couch … Seriously, what on earth was Boris Johnson thinking? … Jesus wept. Car crash doesn’t really cover it.”
TalkRADIO’s Julia Hartley-Brewer tweeted: “I will forever be grateful to Dom Cummings for delivering Brexit … But. No one is above the law. Especially during a pandemic. It’s too late for an apology now. He has to go.”
And my favourite from ConservativeHome founder Tim Montgomerie: “I’m really embarrassed to have ever backed Boris Johnson for high office.”.
Some common marks of fascism, which may sound familiar ...
Nationalism: especially when defined in terms of ethnicity and ancestry, denigrating the social benefit of immigrants ("hostile environment"), the maintenance of cultural national purity (eg: complaints about "too many Polish shops")
National self-determination: could be part of above, but the obvious parallels with Brexshit make it worthy of a point on it's own
A "survival of the fittest" pseudo-Darwinianism: denial of aid to those deemed "unworthy", including the disabled. 20th century fascists even went for euthanasia to help "nature" along in ridding the nation of the burden of caring for the disabled - currently it's done with establishing a welfare system that's impossible to access and even if you succeed pays far less than is needed.
Romanticism in relation to the past: emphasis on past national achievements, mythologising the past (we see a lot of that with VE Day celebrations, talk of Dunkirk or Blitz spirit etc)
Charismatic leadership: despite all his faults, Johnson is charismatic
Anti-communism: with the tirades against a mildly-left-wing politician like Jeremy Corbyn for being a "commie" (Stalinist, Trot or whatever other epithet people falsely apply) that looks quite obvious
Anti-democratic: happy to use democracy to attain power, but once achieved steadily erode the democratic functions to maintain power. That could include strange prorogations of Parliament, suppression of reports on anti-democratic interference, calling those who oppose the political dogma of the ruling party "enemies of the people", attempts to limit the powers of the courts ...
@Alan Cresswell - this may have been said before, but would you be our Prime Minister, please? Pretty please?
(If the Kiwis won't lend us Jacinda, that is).
He certainly looked and sounded unwell. And as we know, many COVID-19 survivors are suffering quite serious long-term after-effects. I'm sure, however, he has good medical advisors keeping an eye on him.
Ref: Nicola Sturgeon is perhaps more of a controversial figure here in Scotland than might seem apparent elsewhere in the UK. I keep my head down when opinions start circulating from my FB friends! The Independence issue has deeply divided the country, and if some recent reports are right one or two wheels appear to be coming off the SNP wagon. I don't know enough about the intricacies of Hollyrood to have any firm opinion, myself.
So there's a strange dynamic of some people being vociferously anti-Boris Johnson and pro-Sturgeon; and others being vociferously anti- both of them, seeing them as being the same kind of leader with the same bag of dirty tricks.
What’s the betting he ignores them?
Jesus wept. This isn't even worthy of a refutation.
People who believe the current government are fascist belong in the same box as David Icke and the anti-Semitic lizard overlord fantasists.
But, I didn't say "fascist".
Even the Spectator is running a piece on Johnson not being fit for office.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-isn-t-fit-to-lead
The Spectator]!
Wow.
Just wow.
AFZ
A paywall...
Curses.
But wow, anyway...
Yes, sorry about that. I don't really want to give them any money either but the headline is enough.
Wow again.
Right click. View source. Scroll down until you find the text of the article. Copy and paste to text editor of your choice for easier reading. Most paywalls are susceptible to this.
They were the first right-wing publication to demand Cummings be sacked - now this. It reads exactly like the conversations Rev T and I have whenever Boris appears on TV. (Side question, why does the remote always jam whenever that happens?)
The complete work of fiction article Cummings and his wife wrote for them describing being ill with Covid-19 probably has nothing to do with it.
The term used was Neo-Facist. As pointed out it is no different from claiming Corbyn is a communist. In all my years there has not been one Conservative government that has truly helped those who need it. Before he had to act on Covid Boris was heading the same way.
Yeah the current government are just like the National Front aren't they.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/neofascism
Is there a :rolleyes: emoticon, or a :faceplam: one?
It is noticeable how groups like the BNP have all but disappeared since the tories started adopting their Islamophobia, anti-ziganism and so on.
But do go on, tell us how Corbyn is just like Stalin. We're waiting.
If we just look at the Britannica.com summary, we have:
"Advocates extreme nationalism" - that covers Brexshit, which is ultimately just an extreme reaction to a perception that the nations of the UK are being swallowed into a greater Europe (which, they aren't, of course), taken to the extreme of coming out of the EU at massive economic and social costs.
"Attacks Marxism and other left wing ideologies" - the treatment given to moderate left-wing policies advocated by Jeremy Corbyn comes close to "attack", let alone the reaction to genuine far-left groups.
"Indulges in racist and xenophobic scapegoating" - the message from the Conservatives and other right wing parties and their media supporters for many years has been to promote a narrative that the economic problems of the UK are due to immigration, lots of crap about "immigrants taking your jobs" or "immigrant scroungers living off UK taxpayer funded benefits". We have a government that has for many years described their immigration policy as being to create a "hostile environment". And, even to the point where senior politicians can get away with inciting violence by comparing Muslim women to street furniture ("post boxes") and criminals ("bank robbers").
"Promotes populist right-wing economic programs" - of course, the Conservatives have always promoted right-wing economics. Recent years have seen an increase in populism within those programs (including, of course, Brexshit).
So, thanks for posting a link to the Britannica.com site which so clearly demonstrates my point.
Allow me to quote Theresa May, the great neo-fascist dictator, who said in a dinner speech "The Death of Stalin depicts an ageing socialist demagogue who maintains his power through a sinister personality cult, rewriting history and crushing all internal dissent. I know we’re all very sorry that Jeremy Corbyn can’t be here tonight.”
The lies of a failed PM are the best you can come up with?
You post a link to a summary of neo-fascism. I listed the characteristics in that description and indicated how the current and recent Conservative government and their media supporters meet those characteristics. Now, I agree that the list of neo-fascist characteristics isn't complete (for example: I'd probably add in something about propaganda, selective use of information that supports the ideology and dismissal of anything that doesn't as either "fake news" or simply ignored as irrelevant), and also that the characteristics of Conservative governments is longer than the few examples I gave. This is a post on a bulletin board, not a book.
In response you draw an analogy which compares three characteristics of Anglicanism with Islamic fundamentalism where only one of those characteristics are shared by both Anglicanism and Islam (belief in God - and, even then there'd be differences in how they describe God, Trinitarianism being fundamental to Anglicanism but anathema to Islam) as though this was in any way comparable or relevant to what I'd posted.
Now, who needs to check their logic?
Ok, my question is, if you genuinely believe we living under the cosh of a fascist (or "neo-fascist") government why haven't you joined the armed struggle to free the country from such tyranny? Surely that's what most reasonable people would do? I would certainly do it, if it ever came to that. Could it be that you actually think we are living in a liberal democracy and that the current government, far from being fascist, is simply mildly right-wing, and that you're not best pleased with that?
Armed struggle is the last resort when democracy has failed almost completely and other avenues of resistance are ineffective.
Personally, I'm not convinced that extreme language, on either side, helps any of us. But that's only my humble o.
The large re-alignment of Jewish voters took place when Milliband was in charge of Labour - and at the time was reported to be due to his stance on the Israel/Palestine issue.
It's possible to pose a similar question over why only 16% of BAME voters vote Tory.
Why would I know that? It could be anything from Boris Johnson's deviousness through to the UK being a global hub through to Rich Tea biscuits making care home residents more susceptible to the virus.
As to Gish Gallop how is one lone person to put up a reasonable defence of a centre-right liberal Prime Minster on a thread infested with rabid socialists who have decided he is a fascist?
When someone puts up a reasonable defence of a centre-right liberal PM we'll be sure to let you know. All we've got right now is someone attacking the former leader of the Labour party to distract from the nasty little shit currently squatting in Downing Street.
I suppose for some socialists, all the above will be equally as bad (or equally as fascist perhaps).