Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: Corbyn

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    731
    That's not anti-establishment though. That's just xenophobia.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    15,609
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Lad View Post
    That's not anti-establishment though. That's just xenophobia.
    Mike,

    When Farage stands up in the European Parliament and accuses all other members of never having had a real job - that's his way of saying "I'm not one of them - I'm one of you".

    When Trump decries the establishment in Washington he's doing exactly the same thing for the US electorate - he's telling them that he's one of the people.

    When combatting these types of politicians it's important to understand what is making them popular rather than just hoping to shut them down with the label of racist.

    It's right to call them out for having xenophobic/racist viewpoints, but it's not enough by itself.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    731
    Quote Originally Posted by Wembley 86 View Post
    Mike,

    When Farage stands up in the European Parliament and accuses all other members of never having had a real job - that's his way of saying "I'm not one of them - I'm one of you".

    When Trump decries the establishment in Washington he's doing exactly the same thing for the US electorate - he's telling them that he's one of the people.
    Obviously, yeah. But there was no mention of that before, only migrants and stuff.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wembley 86 View Post
    When combatting these types of politicians it's important to understand what is making them popular rather than just hoping to shut them down with the label of racist.
    Agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wembley 86 View Post
    It's right to call them out for having xenophobic/racist viewpoints, but it's not enough by itself.
    What I was saying wasn't really "calling them out". It was more to do with your interpretation of the tactics they are using to appear anti-establishment. All I'm saying is that their xenophobic natures have nothing to do with their supposed anti-establishment views.

    Now, I would hate to be labelled some lazy-thinking SJW who just cries "racism" whenever something marginally un-PC happens. But I do feel as if that's the way I'm coming across.

    The new things you cite - Farage's and Trump's speeches. Yes, they say things to appear anti-establishment. Yes, they say they are anti-establishment. I'd say that's not enough on its own to actually BE anti-establishment, but apparently a lot of the general public disagree, and that's what I find disappointing.
    Last edited by Mike Lad; 12th August 2016 at 12:21 PM.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    15,609
    I tend to agree with the analysis put out after the referendum that what the centre left/centre right have failed to understand is that the benefits of globalisation haven't reached the mass of people.

    UKIP and Trump have really 'tuned' into that and their simple messages are now chiming with an electorate that has grown increasingly weary that their political elites aren't doing enough to share the spoils.

    Couple that with other factors including the finger-pointing at vulnerable economic groups in society at you've got two popular movements.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    731
    It's possible to be anti-establishment without blaming immigration for everything so I don't necessarily consider the racism a complimentary factor to the anti-establishment stance.

    I do have a fairly good grasp of how they try to appeal to people in a wider context. My original point, when I said " the likes of Farage and Trump are somehow also able to appeal to those people" was in reference to moe's quote ("people disenfranchised with the current system").

    All I'm saying is, it's sad that Farage and Trump appeal to people "disenfranchised with the current system" because we all know they are massive advocates of the current system really.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    731
    I totally get what you're saying though. No, it's not hard to see why they appeal in general. Yes, it's important to understand why. I mean, from a purely philosophical point of view, it's even unhelpful to assume they are wrong when discussing it.

    Pretty sure they are though...

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    731
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/22/ex-shadow-minister-accuses-jeremy-corbyn-of-discrimination

    The latest instalment sees Corbyn accused of singling out people for being black and female.

    I find that laughable, to be honest. I can be down with "shoddy leadership" accusations - it's all subjective, and she's experienced his leadership first hand. She also does what many people don't when criticising Corbyn - actually cites examples.

    To come out and say that this had anything to do with her skin colour though is just outrageous.

    I'd even go so far as to say slanderous.

    Just undermines her entire point for me.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    sleeping in me Jag
    Posts
    18,299
    In a week when the tories get rid of the human rights act and the nhs announce even more cuts the news is dominated by jeremy corbyn sitting on a train.

    What a trully ****ed up country we live in.
    Way I hear it, Soze some kind of butcher.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    back arse of nowhere Ireland
    Posts
    8,676
    That's the free press for you.
    Was a woman over here speaking about editorial censorship being a plague for journalism.
    Additionally you have reduced investigative journalism budgets.
    And a clique of sorts revolving around political journalism and access to politicians.

    Seems to me also with media coverage there's a suspicious element to how things are covered in quantity or emotional appeals.

    Refugees fleeing to Europe from war in syria sympathies. No beefs with that tbh.

    Victims of war in their own countries less so, wonder if there was some equivalent pictures from the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan say.

    Poverty in Africa.

    Appears as though the Syrian refugees are more palatable as it's responsibility in the press is placed on local government , Isis, Russia.

    Whereas Iraq, Africa etc don't have the projecting of responsibility on other groups of people.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    back arse of nowhere Ireland
    Posts
    8,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Lad View Post
    It's possible to be anti-establishment without blaming immigration for everything so I don't necessarily consider the racism a complimentary factor to the anti-establishment stance.

    I do have a fairly good grasp of how they try to appeal to people in a wider context. My original point, when I said " the likes of Farage and Trump are somehow also able to appeal to those people" was in reference to moe's quote ("people disenfranchised with the current system").

    All I'm saying is, it's sad that Farage and Trump appeal to people "disenfranchised with the current system" because we all know they are massive advocates of the current system really.
    This is a funny one I tend to agree with your sentiments. But essentially our democracy boils down to two party systems that have delivered our current situation. Inequality has risen consistently over the last 50 years. Globally and nationally under both parties. The left to get elected eg Blair and Clinton to a lesser point have jumped on the centre-right centre bandwagon of wealth distribution.
    Taking from the poor and distributing it to a smaller and smaller rich elite.

    A recent enough documentary here by David McWilliams looked at the distribution of wealth, a profit type analysis of remaining income. Check it yourself for better explanations.
    Poorest 20% acquire 0.2% of wealth.
    Middle 60% acquire 26.8%
    Top 20% acquire 73%
    The top 5% almost double the middle 60%s wealth 53.6%. leaving the 15% within top 20 with 19.4% say
    Over the recession income for the very top% had risen around 500% whilst everyone else income has stagnated or declined.

    Then look at - the uk gold- documentary examining the massive tax avoidance industry particularly in London based finance.
    The tax avoidance scale is huge, and one odd factoid I remember is that your average paye employee will pay more tax than some top executives as there income is paid in shares and dividends which can be diverted through tax havens outside of the uk or tax free.
    Of course yere not unique or alone as such on this, nor are we on the wealth distribution.
    Then there are the second and third world shares.

    So all in all is it any wonder that people will be anti-establishment as the people raising these issues aren't politicians. I've heard more capitalists eh philosophers critique the neo liberal economic policies of successive governments than politicians of their own party policies.

    Political electioneering is all about improving the whole through different idealism, though arguably in effect there's not a whole lot of difference idealistically.

    Rising inequality or levels of inequality between countries had shown under numerous health factors and social ills.
    Eg Denmark 1, uk and here twice as bad, USA 4 times and the associated levels of multiple negative outcomes it's alarming how anti equality we actually are.

    The Danes and Scandinavians have only bucked the trend in recent years/decades as memory serves.

    On the immigration view I see it rather cynically as it undermines more often than not working class communities more so in pay relatedness, yet keeps the money in and increases the economy of the host nation, whilst being a brain drain also on developing nations.

    If your wealth distribution is similar to ours, ye also would have a poorest 20% with very little wealth. immigrants and refugees will invariably offer more competition and threat to those people than high income earners.
    Its a fairly hollow ground to judge with relative wealth distribution and the impacts on communities.
    Not that ukip votes , farage supporters are wholely working class or racist.
    Also there's the counterpoint that multi culturalism tends to be a rather hollow concept in itself. The idea is you have many different cultures existing within one society whilst laws or interests are in direct opposition at times.

    Guess I'm saying madness begets madness.

Similar Threads

  1. Corbyn knows this......
    By jasper carot-II in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 15th December 2015, 09:27 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •