Forum Replies Created
-
3 users thanked author for this post.
Very true IA – nobody on the political right now talks about the ‘unacceptable face of capitalism’. That’s because the Tories and Republicans have repositioned themselves as far-right parties where the rules don’t matter and anything goes. There’s been a total collapse in controls for corruption, malfeasance, and truth-telling. Awfulness has become normalised on bothe sides of the Atlantic.
In fact, if it weren’t for its obscene wealth, you could almost classify the US as a 3rd world country, with its stupid guns, loathsome churches, unbridled capitalism in league with right-wing media, and the consequent extensive poverty, social division and violent crime.
Meanwhile, the right talks about too much political correctness! Too many rights for this, rights for that, and how it’s all wrong. They said the same when slavery was abolished and again with civil rights.
Fact is, that a society as violent, misogynist, racist and unequal as America clearly doesn’t have enough PC. And those who ignore or deny it, are complicit in it. They keep it going, and ensure it won’t change. Quite how the political right and their conscience manage this really does beggar belief – whether Christian, Atheist or Jedi!
Oh, and in sum, very dim Les.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Trump is a charismatic authoritarian bully, an inveterate lying narcissist, with a man-child mentality. He’s totally unfit to lead, but he will and does appeal to those who like far-right politics, populism, and dislike the social changes posed by feminism, lgbtq rights, multiculturalism, etc.
Trump appeals to those who like strong, right-wing leaders who dislike experts, ignore facts, and who like to work on gut feelings backed up by an ability to work a (dim) crowd into a frenzy with tub-thumping preaching/speeches, populist rhetoric and slogans. He’s a sort of Francisco Franco for the 21st century, and his appeal to JL is guaranteed.
In the 20-teens there was a fashion for this kind of leader (see also Johnson and Farage), largely due to austerity and the ways in which people were persuaded to blame immigration and the EU, rather than the right-wing leaders and their lack of economic control.
Had Trump been a man of the left, he’d (rightly) have been crucified by the right-wing media long ago. It’s only down to press bias that Trump, Farage and Johnson have prospered.
Personally, I see a nightmarish orange person with a rat-clown face whose trousers end up around his ankles every time he speaks.
2 users thanked author for this post.
there is no such thing as an illegal asylum seeker
Aye, it’s the law that makes an act illegal, not a person, and when people are trying to escape danger, there’s no question of illegality.
Britain is often the country to which refugees gravitate when there’s war, poverty and other threats at home. Why? Because after so many British invasions and involvement in countries around the world, mainly due to imperial expansion, trade and the need for oil, English is the second language of millions, plus, compared to many political and religious dictatorships, the country has a reputation for being decent and humane, so it’s a natural choice.
Course, the main reason we know about the problems besetting refugees is because of the BBC. If public service broadcasting were abandoned to the profit motive, who on earth would bother to make a programme about problems in Syria, Afghanistan etc? There’s no money in it, and it only makes people empathise and question global inequality. Much cheaper and more profiable to make a cheap game show or similar.
And yes, there are abuses of our generosity, just as there are abuses of any system created to help those in dire straits. The Tories said the same when the welfare state was set up here. But it’s a right-wing trick to focus on the few abuses and argue they are widespread and typical, when they are neither. True, these arrangements will never function perfectly, but we shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good, as every Christian knows.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Just to get back on track for a moment…
The BBC is excellent and one of this country’s crown jewels. But that’s not to say it’s perfect. Last week we saw Fiona Bruce say that Johnson’s dad had only hit his wife once, which she dismissed as if unimportant, despite evidence he’d hit her on repeated occasions. Bruce subsequently resigned from her post as ‘ambassador’ for a domestic violence charity and quite right too, it was a stupid remark.
Perhaps more serious was the way on which the BBC interviewed expert economists and others during the Brexit campaign, and for ‘balance’ they also interviewed Kippers and others, most of whom were thicker than a whale omelette. Now, if everyone can see it’s raining outside and someone says ‘no, the sun’s shining’, you don’t interview the ‘shiners’ in the name of balance! Yet, this is what happened on too many occasions. Complete idiots were treated with deference / reverence, as if they were experts.
Same with Johnson – he’s a proven liar and deserves to be called out when he tells lies, yet auntie failed and fails still, to do this on numerous occasions.
And then there’s this ‘ere chairman, a man with no experience in broadcasting, and one who has does big favours for Johnson, and compromises the ‘arm’s length’ principle of the BBC.
Despite these weaknesses it has proved a reliable source of info during Covid and still is a leading source on international news, such as the reporting from Ukraine, which is why the rest of the world looks to it as a beacon of excellence, and totalitarian governments fear and ban it.
Privatise the news, and what are you left with? Trump-supporting conspiracy stations like G-Beebies and Sky, with an avalanche of adverts in which the first casualty is truth. In fact the news itself would become like an advert… for the liars and charlatans on the far-right. Why? Because it suits the agenda of those funding them, and because it’s so easy for others to pay/sponsor a broadcaster to churn out sensational, exaggerated and plain untrue stories about foreigners, scroungers, teachers, doctors, lefties… all without a shred of evidence.
Yep, the BBC has it’s problems, but the way in which it’s funded allows it to keep at arms length from government, and consistently be the best there is, not only at news but at bringing the country together. That’s because it can commission programmes which are not necessarily profitable, but are nevertheless important, e.g. documentaries about history, nature, science and so on, even religious programmes which I resent but accept. That’s in contrast to channels of wall to wall commercial ‘messages’ interspersed with game shows, etc. – as informative, educational and entertaining as an ocular migraine.
All that said, the BBC has two of the most annoying people on TV – Winkleperson and Balding. Aye, shut it down now!
4 users thanked author for this post.
BI Mr Perfect – maintaining his record of being wrong about everything as usual! The Peter Swann of non-football!
The government is criticised for using language that only 20 years ago would have been the language of the BNP, and BI’ waffles about taxpayers’ rights.
The public has every right to be concerned about this government’s nefarious back-door influence on the BBC, which is becoming commonplace…
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/bbc-editors-asked-journalists-avoid-210844842.htmlUnsurprisingly, many presenters have been critical of government policy for some time. Although there are rules about it, they are not clear given how social media has evolved, and consequently enforcement has been lax. BI’s list is selective, but here’s a longer one….
https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/gary-lineker-singled-long-list-201937853.htmlBut, far from damaging the BBC, the widespread support for Lineker’s comments shows how much the Tories are hated inside and outside the corporation. It also shows how BI’s fictitious ‘taxpayer’ (how 1980s! – millions don’t pay tax but still have a voice) expects the BBC not to bow to government pressure, and to respect the free expression of views by freelancers, particularly when they involve criticism of language used by the government being redolent of 1930s Germany.
I expect the Tories love a freelancer because they’re relatively easy to hire and fire. Now it seems they want to muzzle them too.
As for BBC staff being very unhappy – I’m not surprised. The low pay, the creeping managerialism, the increasing attempts by government to shut them up…. Why, I know quite a few senior people at the BBC, including one journalist currently on a flagship news programme. It’s an open secret that many of the staff are uncomfortable that Lineker was initially singled out for special treatment when he’s not even a BBC employee. So, it’s hardly surprising that those on a fraction of his income will feel satisfied with the outcome when he often says what they are thinking, but not permitted to say. (Thanks, BI)
And BI, just listen to yourself when you’re sounding off about “Lineker’s morals”. Egregious hypocrisy straight from the Daily Mail! In many respects the government you still slavishly support tries to behave just like the Qataris – they attempt to control the media, they have little respect workers’ rights, little respect for human rights, and they ignore as much as they can the kind of legislation designed to protect them. They hate anyone who opposes, and would delight in being able to shut them up Qatari style – hence the attempts to strong-arm the BBC into submission. OK, so at least they don’t use religion as a fig leaf to justify these abuses. But you really need to own these contradictions and own up.
3 users thanked author for this post.
Many use religion as a camouflage for hurtful and bigoted opinions, as it frequently gets them a ‘free pass’ and is excused if it’s part of someone’s faith. But it shouldn’t be. It should be called out and challenged.
When we hear from the religious right that ‘abortion is morally wrong’, or ‘women shouldn’t have babies outside wedlock’ and so on… rather than meekly commenting ‘Oh I see, it’s your religious belief, so you can carry on exercising your rights over other people’s bodies and lives or at least supporting those organisations that do just that’, it’s important to oppose this sort of closed-minded bigotry, no matter whether the origin is Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Jedi…
Thankfully, church and state have been separate for centuries in this country, which without doubt has enabled human rights to progress in a ways which have not been possible in many others, particularly the rights of women, gays, and minorities in general. Everyone should be grateful for this enlightenment and de-throning of religious authority, rather than longing for a return to darkness, bigotry and deference to superstition.
1 user thanked author for this post.
It’s because of the council elections, which aren’t far away.
To seek the votes of the frightened and angry, they have to make folk think about something other than the state of the NHS/schools/high energy prices/food shortages/dirty rivers/the cost of living and inflation/the consequences of Brexit…. and instead blame foreigners in general and refugees in particular, especially as they are so dramatically visible in small boats. Never mind the fact the Tories have had 13 years to sort this out.
Paradoxically,the biggest consumers of this red meat live in areas where immigration is low, such as north Lincs., compared to pretty much any big town/city. That’s because if you’ve been brought up in a classroom with kids from ten different countries around you, you’d think nothing of it. Yet if you were brought up in a classroom where the kids all looked like you, talked like you and so on, you’d be much more susceptible to all the anti-immigration rhetoric/lies put about in the popular press and by parties such as UKIP.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Haha, after hearing this it’s both!
Agree with IA here, evolution does maintain interest rather than stagnation and arrogantly performing same old same old with a ‘take it or leave it’ attitude. But it sometimes poses a problem when artists want to evolve and change but fans just want the old stuff – has been a problem for Bowie, Stones, McCartney etc etc.
