Welcome to the RedVee.Net forums!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss Rugby League, chat all things Saints and share opinions with other RedVee.Net members.

SignUp Now!

Life, Politics, Society, Beer

Gray77

never offline
Joined
30 March 2006
Messages
8,447
We seem to get into discussions about all the above topics on the main forum at the drop of a hat, so why not stick them all in one thread away from the main RL chat, so that people that don't wish to partake don't have to but those that do can have the debate away from the main board. All in here please.
 
We seem to get into discussions about all the above topics on the main forum at the drop of a hat, so why not stick them all in one thread away from the main RL chat, so that people that don't wish to partake don't have to but those that do can have the debate away from the main board. All in here please.

Good idea to start this thread. Wondering if people are looking forward to Cheltenham soon...? Love the horse racing.

I'm sure AD will be scouring the form for his betting and TT will be on point to monitor his performance.
 
Last edited:
Its pathetic isn’t it. Someone has an opinion that does’nt fit an orthodoxy and they are gonners. Like an inverted form of McCarthyism.


If I very publicly called people who are fighting for equality 'scum', I doubt my employer would be calling me in for a raise.

It's nothing like McCarthyism, and claiming it is shows a lack of understanding of that McCarthy era.
 
If I very publicly called people who are fighting for equality 'scum', I doubt my employer would be calling me in for a raise.

It's nothing like McCarthyism, and claiming it is shows a lack of understanding of that McCarthy era.
In another article he address this.

He made the "scum" comments over a year ago. Which he apologised for.

He has since then gone on to film 2 more series of the show.

He left because he felt C4 wasnt letting do the show in a gritty way. C4 are using the BLM / EDL comment as a way to show they are woke.
 
If I very publicly called people who are fighting for equality 'scum', I doubt my employer would be calling me in for a raise.

It's nothing like McCarthyism, and claiming it is shows a lack of understanding of that McCarthy era.

It's an opinion; just that an opinion. It may be a crass opinion (and equally a bunch of whoppers chanting 'no justice, no peace' at the UK Police in the middle of a lockdown was offensive to me) but the reaction to it stinks. Its vindictive, small minded and counter productive.

The framing of a prevailing orthodoxy, often by too many people overplaying victimhood (and too often guilty of exactly the type of thing they accuse) together with the unreasonable vicissitudes of reaction from some corporations is worrying.

More so as no one seems willing to engage in any sort of a wider debate on the parameters of what was said and why. Has Middleton being given the opportunity to say what was objectionable for example - vandalising Churchill's statue. I think many would agree that was distasteful. Instead its just a childish 'we disagree with your sentiment so we'll close you down type' reaction and I don't like it at all.

Its like sentimentalism has been allowed to supercede fact, logic and reason. I for one respect the right for someone to have a different opinion, though the volatility of these opinions and the speed and shortcuts by which people make those judgement can be quite alarming. I would'nt seek to 'silence' them however. The characterisation of BLM almost unchallengeable I have a massive problem with. There's little doubt that people want a fair society, however there are elements of its narrative I find contentious and uncomfortable. Likewise I question how the aim of a fair society is best achieved though that's a dangerous position to hold seemingly because to do so risks being branded some sort of racist.
 
Last edited:
If I very publicly called people who are fighting for equality 'scum', I doubt my employer would be calling me in for a raise.

It's nothing like McCarthyism, and claiming it is shows a lack of understanding of that McCarthy era.

That's a massive generalisation, that they were all fighting for equality. Was the person who climbed on the cenotaph and set fire to the flag anything but a yob? Were the people who attacked unarmed police merely freedom fighters? The person who threw the object at the police horse? The people who smashed windows and looted shops, etc, etc, all whilst ignoring any kind of Covid restrictions and probably causing untold health issues to their families as a result. He hasn't opposed the fight against racism, he called some of the protestors 'scum', and if a group of people acted the same way in support of something you objected to you wouldn't be so kind in your response I would say.
 
That's a massive generalisation, that they were all fighting for equality. Was the person who climbed on the cenotaph and set fire to the flag anything but a yob? Were the people who attacked unarmed police merely freedom fighters? The person who threw the object at the police horse? The people who smashed windows and looted shops, etc, etc, all whilst ignoring any kind of Covid restrictions and probably causing untold health issues to their families as a result. He hasn't opposed the fight against racism, he called some of the protestors 'scum', and if a group of people acted the same way in support of something you objected to you wouldn't be so kind in your response I would say.


When you're a public figure, it comes with responsibilities because, rightly or wrongly, you have influence over others. Your comments/behaviour will also be taken by broadcasters, advertisers or sponsors as potentially reflecting negatively on those companies.

There's a way to condemn acts that you don't agree with, without hurling inflammatory insults.

Most employers will also have a clause in your T&C's regarding social media conduct (amongst other many things).
 
When you're a public figure, it comes with responsibilities because, rightly or wrongly, you have influence over others. Your comments/behaviour will also be taken by broadcasters, advertisers or sponsors as potentially reflecting negatively on those companies.

There's a way to condemn acts that you don't agree with, without hurling inflammatory insults.

Most employers will also have a clause in your T&C's regarding social media conduct (amongst other many things).

So society is reduced to figures in the spotlight all towing a sterile, party line to 'potentially' protect a corporate image. How very enlightened. Mind you we've even got a shitty tea company telling the Chancellor not to drink their tea so the risible self importance of external affairs, corporate branding and marketing departments these days should not be downplayed. I'm sure there is a spot reserved in heaven for them.

I agree that Middleton's comments could be phrased more articulately but that's why opening up them up and dissecting them could have helped the situation not worsen it, particularly as it was from someone who has fought for this country. I'll admit that's hard on a platform like twitter, especially given the manifest stupidity of too many of the general public (many years back I created a spoof account on there and had to close it in 24 hours because of the amount of gullible, judgemental imbeciles).

The supposed negative influence of the original comments has now been magnified by the emotionally fragile response of those at Channel 4 and the media company. Pathetic and a form of moral cowardice.
 
Last edited:
Didn't a university remove Chaucer from the syllabus the other day as he's not diverse enough?

I believe it was the University of Leicester. More PC sh*te from people that want to instil a Big Brother regime and rewrite white, European history but enough of that or we’ll politicise this thread. Instead, I’ll just think back to my A-level studies of Chaucer and remember the bawdy stories in Canterbury Tales.
 
I believe it was the University of Leicester. More PC sh*te from people that want to instil a Big Brother regime and rewrite white, European history but enough of that or we’ll politicise this thread. Instead, I’ll just think back to my A-level studies of Chaucer and remember the bawdy stories in Canterbury Tales.

Or, for those not told how to think the the Daily Heil or other right-wing media that are intent on whipping up a culture war...

the English department would no longer teach medieval literature due to "a drop in demand from undergraduate and postgraduate students in recent years".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-55860810

Perhaps some would prefer the university to run a course with minimal demand just so it sates the anger of a *certain group of people with distinct, right-wing, nationalist political opinions*

That the University is seeking to 'decolonise' its teachings is a separate issue, and isn't as sinister as some may knee-jerkingly leap to conclude. It is, according the the university, "reconsidering how the subject is taught "to make it more inclusive and reflect emerging developments. For example, many reading lists are dominated by white authors. This ignores many great BAME scholars and also means that BAME students do not see themselves reflected in what they are being taught."

FTR, Leicester University has 56% of undergraduate students that identify as BAME.
 
Or, for those not told how to think the the Daily Heil or other right-wing media that are intent on whipping up a culture war...

So it's only a culture war when the right oppose things. Was it not a culture war already? Is that not what 'progressives' have been fighting for years across academia and the media?

Genuine question. I'm on the left, have been all my life, but I don't recognise half of the progressive stuff now as anything but illiberal. People on the right are bound to argue against some of it, and when they do it isn't the start of a culture war, it is them joining a pre-existing one. Was removing the names and tarring the reputations of people like David Hume not a culture war, or is that fair game until someone argues against it?

And since when has it been a universities job to teach things based on students demands? Do students now have the power to change the curriculum based on trends and current vogues? Universities are supposed to be places that challenge students, show them ideas and issues that they don't agree with, and allow them to develop the art of debate. Simply teaching them what suits their ideological whims at 18 is plain stupid.
 
So it's only a culture war when the right oppose things. Was it not a culture war already? Is that not what 'progressives' have been fighting for years across academia and the media?

Genuine question. I'm on the left, have been all my life, but I don't recognise half of the progressive stuff now as anything but illiberal. People on the right are bound to argue against some of it, and when they do it isn't the start of a culture war, it is them joining a pre-existing one. Was removing the names and tarring the reputations of people like David Hume not a culture war, or is that fair game until someone argues against it?

And since when has it been a universities job to teach things based on students demands? Do students now have the power to change the curriculum based on trends and current vogues? Universities are supposed to be places that challenge students, show them ideas and issues that they don't agree with, and allow them to develop the art of debate. Simply teaching them what suits their ideological whims at 18 is plain stupid.



I'm not a fan of identity politics, either, and would prefer the Labour Party to focus on addressing the ills of society as a whole rather than on minority issues.

Of course there's a tussle between traditionalists/conservatives/reactionaries and 'progressives' - but it's been that way for decades/centuries. With regards to the current 'culture war' it seems to me that for many on the 'progressive' side, there's a desire to teach the whole of history, warts and all, and not some airbrushed version that is pro-Empire and deifies prominent figures of the time without also educating people on their bad points (before the Colson statue was dumped in the quay, campaigners had for years been arguing for its removal, or at least a plaque referencing his prominent role in the barbaric slave trade and that source of his wealth, as well as the renaming of places that bore his name; Colson Hall had in 2017 already announced a name change to take place in 2020). Whereas, on the reactionary side, it's a desire to keep the sanitized version of history intact without having to consider 'inconvenient truths'.

I'll agree that moves to demonise Davide Hume are ill-placed. His brother Paul was the real bad 'un. :p

Universities have always responded to student demand for courses. They are businesses after all (especially so since the Tory/Lib Dem government slashed funding to heap most of the cost of degrees onto students). If they only have a handful of students a year wanting to study Medieval Literature then, like any other Uni, they will drop the course. If they were dropping something like Media Studies for the same reason, I very much doubt the Daily Heil and other right-wing newspapers and social media bores would get their jackboots in a twist. But the Heil et al will weave false narratives behind the motives of moves such as these, simply to inflame public opinion against what is now termed 'woke'.

Of course, the Culture War is a handy diversion to deflect public attention away from the expanding wealth inequality and massive scale tax dodging by the financial elite in this country (is it a coincidence that the owners of the Heil, Torygraph, Scum, Times and, until recently, the Express have all been widely accused of endemic tax dodging?)
 
I'm not a fan of identity politics, either, and would prefer the Labour Party to focus on addressing the ills of society as a whole rather than on minority issues.

The Labour Party is finished IMO if the likes of us are pinning our hopes on them going back to what they used to be, namely a party that prioritised the concerns of those that actually need a Labour government.

Today, Labour radicals are mainly composed of middle class urban types who don't really need a Labour government, hence them prioritising niche issues because for them fighting social justice wars is more important than helping the poor and deprived. I've worked with loads of them in London, they'll campaign for every social issue under the sun but they're economic liberals basically.

They all user Uber and roll their eyes when you ask them about Uber's tax policy or worker rights, they all buy stuff from Amazon then claim it's fine because they use recycled card on their packages, they all join the private healthcare package at work and then stick an NHS rainbow on their twitter handles, and they all laugh when you ask them if they want to join a Union.

These people dominate the Labour Party now, and there is no going back. Outside of a few bastions of proper working class Labour strongholds like Liverpool and Newcastle, the party is now a middle class social justice talking shop. It won't win another election unless those people break away and form another party.
 
The Labour Party is finished IMO if the likes of us are pinning our hopes on them going back to what they used to be, namely a party that prioritised the concerns of those that actually need a Labour government.

Today, Labour radicals are mainly composed of middle class urban types who don't really need a Labour government, hence them prioritising niche issues because for them fighting social justice wars is more important than helping the poor and deprived. I've worked with loads of them in London, they'll campaign for every social issue under the sun but they're economic liberals basically.

They all user Uber and roll their eyes when you ask them about Uber's tax policy or worker rights, they all buy stuff from Amazon then claim it's fine because they use recycled card on their packages, they all join the private healthcare package at work and then stick an NHS rainbow on their twitter handles, and they all laugh when you ask them if they want to join a Union.

These people dominate the Labour Party now, and there is no going back. Outside of a few bastions of proper working class Labour strongholds like Liverpool and Newcastle, the party is now a middle class social justice talking shop. It won't win another election unless those people break away and form another party.

This is the crux of the issue. The Labour party is barely a Labour party anymore; Paul Embery's brilliant book is one of number that has touched on this. The Party has fast become a red wine quaffing bunch of pony club socialists that can't think past the social dilemma's of the Islington dilettante. Its a distance away from what it was and who it represented when it was founded by Keir Hardie.

The party has lost touch with its roots and is little more than a PR company for niche causes (I've seen it with its bonkers position on horse racing as another example). Yet those same people won't listen to any sort of criticism of our economic system and the inequalities produced by it: that those near or at the bottom of the economic ladder are always likely to suffer a range of social injustices.

It happened a century ago when heavy industry workers were losing their lives in accidents and lived in slum housing, or generations before that when young boys/girls in Yorkshire were losing limbs in the satanic mills. They were the prices of capitalism of that age and why Hardie's Labour party was so important. That same system is still likely to generate inequality; its just not as brutal. The laws and regulations won by the struggles of those workers and the mindset that changed through technological advances and innovation have helped give us better lives but inequality is still there.

The Labour Party - a party that likes to talk about what can't be done rather than what can - wants everyone to believe that there's some sort of innate racism inside us when the reality is that the economic system that always needs to be held to scrutiny. It vacated this territory a long time ago; it never recovered from effectively 'losing the argument' to Thatcher and Major when the reality was that this was as much if not more of its own failures than the successes of those governments.

The Labour party got a kicking in the last election and deserves it again. That Leigh would be won by the Conservatives was unthinkable even just 10 years ago but it says something when those people think the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg have more in common with them than Labour MP's. For as long Labour advocates mock them for it Labour will continue to lose; they may want to whinge about 'gammon,' or put it down to 'unenlightened,' 'ignorance' and 'racists' etc but I'm sure the Conservative MP's in the likes of Bury, Leigh, Bolton etc will encourage them to continue. Its the reason they won their seats in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Or, for those not told how to think the the Daily Heil or other right-wing media that are intent on whipping up a culture war...

the English department would no longer teach medieval literature due to "a drop in demand from undergraduate and postgraduate students in recent years".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-55860810

Perhaps some would prefer the university to run a course with minimal demand just so it sates the anger of a *certain group of people with distinct, right-wing, nationalist political opinions*

That the University is seeking to 'decolonise' its teachings is a separate issue, and isn't as sinister as some may knee-jerkingly leap to conclude. It is, according the the university, "reconsidering how the subject is taught "to make it more inclusive and reflect emerging developments. For example, many reading lists are dominated by white authors. This ignores many great BAME scholars and also means that BAME students do not see themselves reflected in what they are being taught."

FTR, Leicester University has 56% of undergraduate students that identify as BAME.

As a former Leiceseter University student, I find the response from the University dubious and disingenuous to say the least.
 
The left are far more responsible for the culture wars we see these days, over here and in America in particular. The left are always trying to create rifts between white and black, men and women, gay and straight. It’s getting ridiculous. Todays centre right are actually quite liberal. But the left have gone so far left its insane. The intolerant tolerant lefties are ruining everything. The so called anti fascists have become the biggest fascists of all. Its their way or no way. Mainstream media is pretty much all left leaning.
Its crazy these days. You insult a black person, you’re racist. You explain something to a woman and you’re mansplaining, you have the audacity to disagree with a woman and you’re a misogynist. The so called ‘right wingers’ aren’t fighting back, just normal folk who have had enough of this nonsense.

I’m scared to say hello to a passing lady in the street these days incase the feminists (and sh** stirring rags like the Guardian) have convinced her im out to do a Sarah Everard.
For the last 4 years mainstream media has tried to shame anyone who voted Brexit painting a picture of mass racism. As if 52% of this country is racist. Complete nonsense. Its the same in America. CNN has spent 4 years painting a picture that Trump is a white supremacist. Now that he’s out they will spend the next 4 years shaming anyone who dared vote for him labelling them all Nazis.
And universities are a disgrace. The students only want to debate with others who share their views. Thats hardly a debate imo.
 
Last edited:
The left are far more responsible for the culture wars we see these days, over here and in America in particular. The left are always trying to create rifts between white and black, men and women, gay and straight. It’s getting ridiculous. Todays centre right are actually quite liberal. But the left have gone so far left its insane. The intolerant tolerant lefties are ruining everything. The so called anti fascists have become the biggest fascists of all. Its their way or no way. Mainstream media is pretty much all left leaning.
Its crazy these days. You insult a black person, you’re racist. You explain something to a woman and you’re mansplaining, you have the audacity to disagree with a woman and you’re a misogynist. The so called ‘right wingers’ aren’t fighting back, just normal folk who have had enough of this nonsense.

I’m scared to say hello to a passing lady in the street these days incase the feminists (and sh** stirring rags like the Guardian) have convinced her im out to do a Sarah Everard.
For the last 4 years mainstream media has tried to shame anyone who voted Brexit painting a picture of mass racism. As if 52% of this country is racist. Complete nonsense. Its the same in America. CNN has spent 4 years painting a picture that Trump is a white supremacist. Now that he’s out they will spend the next 4 years shaming anyone who dared vote for him labelling them all Nazis.
And universities are a disgrace. The students only want to debate with others who share their views. Thats hardly a debate imo.

I agree, I was talking to some yanks in the bar on Wednesday night. In the main they were ••••ing idiots but got talking to a lad who was of Jamaican/Japanese heritage and he was saying he's embarrassed by it all and that in the end it was causing more division than anything else.

Regarding the feminists at the moment, I kind of had my wings clipped a bit earlier in the week. I was chatting to a young lady who I'd very much like to do the horizontal bedroom dance with and she went off on one at me, I thought it was a bit of an over reaction until she explained a few things and I can see how some women feel because it's the same as I feel sometimes as a straight, white man that nobody wants to listen to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom