[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
random

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 413317)
Message
File  []
close
free-speech-conditions-apply-graffiti.jpg
413317413317413317
>> No. 413317 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 2:07 am
413317 Free speech V2
Good news that UK universities will be deregulated unless they allow free speech under new plans. Hopefully more of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwVD1Efqbk
Expand all images.
>> No. 413318 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 2:26 am
413318 spacer
>>413317
Oh look, it's this thread again. You're not fooling anyone, lad. Back to /iq/ with you.
>> No. 413319 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 10:55 am
413319 spacer
I hadn't heard about this but having attended a university where no platforming led the cowardly university to cancel a guest debate I'm all for it. Ideally I'd like to see a speakers corner in every university but I imagine the children would never allow it.

News link because OP is some controlled opposition mentalist:
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/19/ministers-plan-fines-for-universities-which-fail-to-uphold-free-speech

>>413318
Fuck off B1064. Nobody buys your argument that restrictions on free speech at universities boils down to arguments for harassment.
>> No. 413321 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 3:46 pm
413321 spacer
>>413319

The same government that wants you to call a hotline if a brown person talks about ISIS, is threatening to fine universities for not inviting old fisherpersons to say trans women are actually perverts in dresses.

I find it utterly hypocritical. In no way does Britain have free speech. Is the Tory party seriously getting cold feet now the bigotry of the young doesn't match up with their own?
>> No. 413322 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 3:58 pm
413322 spacer
I'll embed it for you then, tit.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwVD1Efqbk

I bet it's utter shite.
>> No. 413323 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 3:59 pm
413323 spacer
What a fucking shocker.
>> No. 413324 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 4:22 pm
413324 spacer
>>413321
>is threatening to fine universities for not inviting old fisherpersons to say trans women are actually perverts in dresses
It's rather worse than that. Things which have been identified as threats to free speech include the sort of thing you find in the employee handbook, such as anti-harassment or "dignity at work" policies. Apparently freedom of speech means the inalienable right to be a massive bellend in the admissions office without consequence.
>> No. 413328 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 5:53 pm
413328 spacer
If I can't tell gays that they are inhuman abominations and subsequently be invited to speak to some at one of this country's educational institutions, then the daft militant wogs have won my friends.
>> No. 413330 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 6:39 pm
413330 spacer
>>413321
So your argument is not that the government protecting academic debate in our universities is a bad thing but that it simply does not go far enough?

Unless you're seriously suggesting that fisherpersons are about to rise up to start running over London commuters because someone had wrong-views during a university debate.

>>413324
What you can do is challenge these views in an academic debate, don't cry because the naughty mans words hurt your feelings and demand the university put a stop to it.
>> No. 413333 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 7:14 pm
413333 spacer
>>413330
>the government protecting academic debate in our universities
I hear Live at the Apollo are looking to fill some backup slots.
>> No. 413337 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 8:36 pm
413337 spacer
>>413330
>the naughty mans words hurt your feelings

It's indicative of your privilege, and therefore failure to understand the problem, that you would trivialise the reasons behind a no-platform policy in this way. Are ideas such as dolphin rape and actual maritime issues so intellectually robust that they actually need to be challenged in an academic context, or can we not just all agree they are unacceptable without wasting our time? And is the opportunity of challenging them really worth the tangible harm and stress it causes to people who suffer from discrimination in their daily lives? Because that's what we're talking about - the views that people are no-platformed for are not some kind of abstract concepts that can be safely handled with gloves in a hermetically-sealed environment. They are things that some people are forced to confront every day of their lives. All that providing a safe space does is show that universities are capable of recognising this and want to let these people breathe easy while studying there.
>> No. 413338 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 9:23 pm
413338 spacer
>>413337
>It's indicative of your privilege, and therefore failure to understand the problem, that you would trivialise the reasons behind a no-platform policy in this way.

And its indicative of your stupidity and therefore failure to understand the purpose of universities, that you would trivialise the value of free academic debate in this way. If the very knowledge that a controversial speaker is on campus is enough to set you off in tears then the problem is you and the question arises of whether you really have the maturity required for academia or even going about daily life.

See, I can attack the speaker too.

>All that providing a safe space does is show that universities are capable of recognising this and want to let these people breathe easy while studying there.

Odd considering no platforming is something the NUS forces.
>> No. 413339 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 9:37 pm
413339 spacer
>>413337
> or can we not just all agree they are unacceptable without wasting our time?

Yes we all need to discuss them because it wasn't that long ago we knew homosexuality was an abomination that didn't need to be discussed, or a hundred years before that the idea that the bible might not be true was an absurdity not worthy of serious consideration. You do not have the clarity of foresight or wisdom to say what ideas will be considered not worthy of discussion in the future if you take this line of reasoning, they might be the ones you give a shit about.


Also and quite crucially you cannot overcome an idea by saying it is not worthy of discussion. Ideas must be brought into the light and defeated otherwise they will fester and grow in the dark. It is only by saying that the emperor has no clothes that society can realise it is true.
>> No. 413340 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 10:07 pm
413340 spacer
>>413337

>can we not just all agree they are unacceptable without wasting our time?

Clearly we don't all agree that they're unacceptable, which is precisely why we need to be vigorously arguing against these ideas rather than simply shouting them down.

For the last twenty-odd years, we've stigmatised and silenced anything vaguely resembling anti-immigrant sentiment. Anyone who suggested that immigration was too high was dismissed as a racist, even in the face of unprecedented levels of immigration from the A8. Nobody on the left made the case for immigration, nobody took the concerns of these people seriously, nobody took the time to assuage fears and actively engender mutual understanding, we just yelled "racist".

48% of the population woke up on the 24th of June 2016 and were shocked to learn that we're leaving the EU. The left-wing press was full of dazed and uncomprehending thinkpieces about how this result could have possibly happened. The Remain campaign was caught totally unprepared, because it had vastly under-estimated the strength of anti-EU (and by extension anti-immigrant) sentiment. The 52% had simply lost faith in the establishment, after decades of being propagandised to by the right-wing press while also being systematically ignored, belittled and patronised by the internationalist left. The result was utterly unsurprising to anyone who had spent time in the pubs and clubs of the north, but no-one in the left-wing media or political establishment had bothered to spend any time talking to the people they purport to represent.

If the ideas of Greer and Hitchens and Yiannopoulos are so obviously devoid of merit, then a group of highly educated young people should be able to deftly dismantle their arguments and send them home with their tail between their legs. University is exactly the place where progressive young people should be learning to master the art of rhetoric and develop powerful arguments against bad ideas. No-platforming is a total surrender of the moral and intellectual high ground.

In 2011, a group of students at Cambridge university no-platformed Eric Pickles. Some of the brightest young people in Britain thought that the opinions of a government minister were so devoid of merit or relevance as to be undeserving of debate. The incident went largely unremarked-upon at the time, but in retrospect I think it was a powerful omen. The left has simply given up on the idea of winning the debate; instead, they've retreated into chanting "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" into the echo chamber of The Canary and Skwawkbox. An outstanding journalist like Laura Kuenssberg becomes a traitor by simple merit of not being an unreserved Corbynite. The opinion polls are propaganda, the BBC is irrevocably biased, centrist Labour MPs are traitors. Corbyn won the election in spirit, which is all that matters; the actual running of the country is secondary to your own ideological purity.

No-platforming is one of many symptoms of a deep malaise in the left. Unless we're willing and able to actually combat objectionable ideas, we're doomed to be led by demagogues.
>> No. 413342 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 11:37 pm
413342 spacer
>>413337
You are utterly mad.
>> No. 413343 Anonymous
22nd October 2017
Sunday 11:58 pm
413343 spacer
Does that mean we can have Shamanismic clerics at Unis too? Or is it just for white people to vent their "frustrations"?
>> No. 413344 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 12:26 am
413344 spacer
>>413343

If an Shamanismist wants to come and present a lecture or participate in a debate, I'll book the room for them. If they advocate for peaceful co-existence, I'll applaud them. If they're advocating the oppression of women, I'll dismantle their argument. If they're inciting violence, then I'll call the police.
>> No. 413345 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 4:27 am
413345 spacer
>>413344
I'd just go down the pub.
>> No. 413346 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 11:00 am
413346 spacer
>>413340
>If the ideas of Greer and Hitchens and Yiannopoulos are so obviously devoid of merit, then a group of highly educated young people should be able to deftly dismantle their arguments and send them home with their tail between their legs.
Stupid.

The effort required to create bullshit is much greater than that required to clear it up. Furthermore you can always just ad-hoc things up and leave it unquestionable. For both Scottish Independence and Brexit - at least the former having a big paper vision to beat people over the heads with - there was a huge chance to go "They're bluffing, It'll Be Alright on the Night!" and have it not proven wrong, because it hasn't actually happened yet. guilty of this myself, used to argue treasury was lying about not having a currency union since they could turn around after a hypothetical yes vote to calm markets. have become increasingly convinced that Britain's tendency to not plan means that in reality, we probably would just tell Scotland to fuck off regardless of the then-merits of each course of action.

Debating takes time and effort and in-and-of itself dignifies ideas. The point of debate isn't to battle out ideas in and of itself, it's much more about presentation and rhetoric. Having material reality on your side is a very minor part of the battle. Much, much easier to just tell people to fuck off. (Course, I wouldn't no-platform anyone - I'd platform them in that shitty part of the university 5 miles away from the rest of it, then not advertise their presence at all. If someone's going to try and waste everyone's time with bullshit, might as well have fun with them...)

>In 2011...
so this is the rumoured centrist dad.
>> No. 413347 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 12:16 pm
413347 spacer
>>413344
The government, staunch defenders of free speech, take the position that they should be killed.
>> No. 413348 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 12:17 pm
413348 spacer
>>413340
The fuck? We're talking about no-platforming and you're ranting about Brexit and the Skwawkbox and Corbynites and Laura Kuenssberg? Doesn't take much to set you off does it?
>> No. 413349 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 12:23 pm
413349 spacer
>>413348
Didn't you know? The world revolves around Dear Leader now. No story is complete these days without the Corbyn angle.
>> No. 413350 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 1:23 pm
413350 spacer
>>413348

An intriguing point but the core of his argument stands which is that Eric Pickles was no platformed which is an absurdity if you want to have a remotely balanced exchange of ideas.

It paints a narrative that no platforming is purely a means to an end, a cheep maneuver to silence your opponent deployed primarily (at least at this point in history) by left wing factions rather than for the protection of anyone. Which in that context talking about leftwing factions doubling down on ideological purity and becoming an echochamber is a sound follow up.
>> No. 413351 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 2:02 pm
413351 spacer
>>413346
Your ideas are not dignified in the slightest but here we all are.
>> No. 413352 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 4:35 pm
413352 spacer
>>413348

If you can't see the connection between Momentum and the NUS, I suggest that you attend either of their conferences. The two organisations are so deeply intertwined as to be almost inseparable.
>> No. 413353 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 5:23 pm
413353 spacer
>>413351
Go on, engage with the ideas, show everyone that they're without merit. Don't just say it, don't just cut off avenues to conversation.
Debate me. I'm sure someone will learn something and the world will be better off for having had the discussion.
>> No. 413354 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 6:19 pm
413354 spacer
So racists should be allowed to "debate" in unis, but converts that want to come back after the fall of ISIS should all be killed because the ideas in their heads are dangerous.

Impressive.
>> No. 413355 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 6:41 pm
413355 spacer
>>413354
It's almost as if the premise of this thread, as well as the government's argument, were complete sham.
>> No. 413356 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 7:09 pm
413356 spacer
>>413354

I don't recall anyone mentioning any racists. But even if they did, yes the bloke down the pub who talks ignorant shit is several ranks up on the ladder than a war criminal in terms of tollerablity in a liberal society, how is that a shock to you?
>> No. 413357 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 9:29 pm
413357 spacer
>>413356
Yes, I'm sure Abu Hashish's widow is a war criminal that should face the shooting squad.
>> No. 413358 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 10:13 pm
413358 spacer
Maybe, maybe not, but that 12 year old deffo' was so I'm glad the Yanks killed him. Who know's what he could have become?
>> No. 413359 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 11:48 pm
413359 spacer
>>413346
>The effort required to create bullshit is much greater than that required to clear it up.

You'll find it is easier for others. Whether that is because you fail to grasp how to string together a coherent argument or because your position is simply illogical is anyone's guess.

Anyway you seem to have missed the otherlads argument that restricting debates to what authority considers legitimate stifles society and is not something you would be cheering if the shoe were on the other foot. Furthermore simply pushing things out of view is not going to address the pressures themselves and even emboldens them as every idiot with a whistle seems to have done with Yiannopoulos.

>>413354
>>413357
Bit late in the year to be putting together straw men isn't it? I thought we were discussing free speech in universities not the complex issues involved with citizens travelling abroad to live in caliphates.
>> No. 413360 Anonymous
23rd October 2017
Monday 11:51 pm
413360 spacer
>>413359
>Bit late in the year to be putting together straw men isn't it?
... no? The perfect time for it.
>> No. 413361 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 12:22 am
413361 spacer
>>413359
It is factual. Every Brit other there needs to die.
>> No. 413362 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 12:28 am
413362 spacer
>>413359
So free speech should only be allowed in universities, and not anywhere else in society? Got it.
>> No. 413363 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 12:50 am
413363 spacer
>>413362

Said absolutely no one.
>> No. 413364 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 12:59 am
413364 spacer
>>413359
I'm not sure there's much complexity to "they must be killed". Killed for what is in effect holding radically different views from the majority. So much for freedom of speech, eh?
>> No. 413365 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 1:21 am
413365 spacer
>>413353
I'm too lazy, but I'm not asking the mods to ban you for your absurdity.
>> No. 413366 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 2:22 am
413366 spacer
>>413359
>Whether that is because you fail to grasp how to string together a coherent argument or because your position is simply illogical is anyone's guess.
It's because I enjoy arguing in bad faith and almost never change my positions (in the short term) on the basis of argument beyond a small amendment to the position held before. I do however lie about reality to make my positions appear stronger than they might otherwise look, if I think I can get away with it. especially on the internet. (either outright, huge lies about documented historical events not happening*, or smaller disingenuous moves like using data from foreign countries and handwaving why we can assume the UK is the same - while knowing it isn't.)

If I can do it, anyone else can do it. Certainly, those in power do it. All political parties do it. Hell, I'd assume it's almost a natural part of our worldview.

>Anyway you seem to have missed the otherlads argument that restricting debates to what authority considers legitimate stifles society
A pretty irrelevant point to universities. Angry students aren't the overriding authority in society.
>and is not something you would be cheering if the shoe were on the other foot
I probably wouldn't care. "Ah, we'll allow you to talk but not take you seriously" is a strategy that works perfectly fine against moderate and sensible ideas. It's only when you have bastards that appeal to people's stupidity, or risk offending someone, that there's any reason to question using the strategy. There's no need to censor the powerless. Would public discourse in the UK be significantly different if Paul Krugman saying "austerity is bad" was censored rather than just blithely ignored or shuffled to the back of a Guardian column to die? How many people know or care to begin with?

>Furthermore simply pushing things out of view is not going to address the pressures themselves and even emboldens them as every idiot with a whistle seems to have done with Yiannopoulos.
He just seems like an irrelevant twat tbh, even within the context of Trump's rise to power. All the "dangerous" ideas UK-side (i.e. aligning with Brexit/Drunken Racists) were in plain sight and in the broadly tolerated mainstream of discourse (even in the US, Trump basically said what was previously dogwhistled). They were looked down on as rot, but they were present. The reason people didn't think we'd vote leave wasn't because Tories were being no-platformed at universities, nor the refusal to have an honest debate on the merits of the EU (on the contrary, we had the "Let's get a token Drunken Racistsper onto Question Time to poke people" approach), so much as it was down to a general technocratic approach to politics. (i.e. "the polls say we'll win and they were 'right' in Scotland") Similar story with Hilary. What would more debate have done? Perhaps increased the number of people voting for Trump/Brexit until it was a large enough (likely) majority for opinion polls to pick up?

Something about the Scottish Independence referendum run-up being a genuine national debate and not really doing very much goes here. I'm not sure whether to defend it as "how a debate should be done" or note that it's the one example of such a recent debate where the "anti-status-quo" side played somewhat nice [i.e. not racist, publishing a big book to set out their vision - if short on detail of how to achieve it**.] and their reward was falling short of victory, while the pro-status-quo side was rewarded with a new status quo where all Scotland can do is talk about their constitutional position.

Going to tie this up by being purposefully incendiary and say: In conclusion what we really ought to do is make newspapers publish corrections in the same size and prominence as their original lies. Frontpage headline bullshit? Enjoy your frontpage headline "sorry, that thing about Bananas was bullshit."

*not the holocaust nor anything of that magnitude, for reference.
**in contrast to say, leaving the EU which could be anything you wanted it to be. From free trade to the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1968 to a new social democratic consensus, someone would argue for it. (Many of them to whom I'm sympathetic, lest my overall approach read as being arrogantly pro-EU.)

can you tell i'm procrastinating doing actual work?

>>413365
what you mean is that i'm right and you're just afraid to engage in an open and honest debate, guardian reading plastic coffee cup thingy holding macbook owning kent labour students attending "is there a discount" asking studentlad.
>> No. 413367 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 11:16 am
413367 spacer
>what we really ought to do is make newspapers publish corrections in the same size and prominence as their original lies. Frontpage headline bullshit? Enjoy your frontpage headline "sorry, that thing about Bananas was bullshit."
This is an excellent idea.
>> No. 413368 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 1:55 pm
413368 spacer
>>413317
Tory MP's Brexit demand to universities 'offensive' - Lord Patten - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41735839

>A Eurosceptic Tory MP has been accused ofcompiling a "hit list" of university professors who teach Brexit courses.
>Chris Heaton-Harris has written to universities asking for names of such professors and the content of their lectures.

Thank goodness for these great defenders of academic freedom, eh?
>> No. 413370 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 2:50 pm
413370 spacer
>>413368

Christ you have the brain of a child. Everything is oversimplified black and white, good verses evil isn't it. Just because one side has fault doesn't make the other side right.
>> No. 413371 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 4:29 pm
413371 spacer
>>413370
Either you support freedom of speech or you don't. You can't say you support freedom of speech in certain scenarios for some viewpoints you agree with.

If you can't see the fairly obvious shenanigans going on, then maybe it's you that has the brain of a child.
>> No. 413372 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 4:52 pm
413372 spacer
>>413371

I wasn't tring to have it both ways at all what I was implying was that one tory backbencher doesn't undermine a government intiative addressing the issue of institutionalised censorship. But apparently you can only deal in absolutes.
>> No. 413373 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 5:15 pm
413373 spacer
>>413372
Such is the nature of freedom of speech. Also, the "one rogue X" meme was old when the NotW were pulling it.
>> No. 413374 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 6:24 pm
413374 spacer
>>413372
"NOT REAL TORIES."
>> No. 413375 Anonymous
24th October 2017
Tuesday 7:42 pm
413375 spacer
Nothing to say; nothing to fear.

Nothing to hide; nothing to fear.
>> No. 413387 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 5:59 pm
413387 spacer
As a devout leftist, I can only wish that every single fucking university in this country and every wanker student enrolled at one be burned to the ground in the night.

I seriously fear for the future of the world we live in, where the political spectrum decades from now will consist of perpetually triggered LGBTQ snowflakes on one end and the kind of neo-liberal corporatism straight out of Robocop on the other.

We're already half way there. Families are going into the cold this winter starving, too skint to put the heating on, at risk of eviction, because of the shambles that is Universal Credit. Meanwhile, instead of putting up a fight, the opposition is busy purging thought-criminal MPs who allegedly called some slag a slag 15 fucking years ago.

Some of the posts in this thread hardly fill me with confidence that things will improve. It's going to be utterly fucking dystopian in the future if you cunts have your way.
>> No. 413388 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 6:26 pm
413388 spacer
>>413387
>instead of putting up a fight, the opposition is busy
How's life under that rock of yours?
>> No. 413390 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 7:13 pm
413390 spacer
>>413388

You mean how they're letting May fucking plough on with her trainwreck despite an almost unanimous commons vote? Totally effective opposition there.
>> No. 413391 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 7:16 pm
413391 spacer
>>413387

>As a devout leftist, I can only wish that every single fucking university in this country and every wanker student enrolled at one be burned to the ground in the night.


Nah, mate, you are plainly just a mouthy cunt, so if you could just spare us and stop chatting pure shit I think I speak for everyone when I say we'd be reasonably thankful. Stop spending so much time on the internet too, I can tell you need to from your meme spouting.
>> No. 413392 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 7:35 pm
413392 spacer
>>413390

What exactly is it that you expect them to do? Every time it comes before the House for a vote, they vote against it, as does pretty much every other party not in government. Are they supposed to superglue the doors to the Aye lobby or something?
>> No. 413393 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 7:39 pm
413393 spacer
>>413391

You could just no-platform him if he bothers you that much lad.
>> No. 413394 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 7:39 pm
413394 spacer
>>413387
> Families are going into the cold this winter starving, too skint to put the heating on, at risk of eviction
Survival of the fittest B1064lad
>> No. 413397 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 7:52 pm
413397 spacer
>>413393

He opened with "every single fucking university in this country and every wanker student enrolled at one be burned". Am I supposed to debate that?

>Hmm, but what if we didn't burn hundreds of thousands of people to death because you've assumed they're a monolithic other you're upset at..?
>> No. 413398 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 7:55 pm
413398 spacer
>>413397
I find nothing wrong with that line of thought.
>> No. 413399 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 7:57 pm
413399 spacer
>>413397

One only has to visit Sheffield on a weeknight night to be persuaded he might have a point.
>> No. 413401 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 8:29 pm
413401 spacer
>>413392
It wouldn't surprise me if Jim Callaghan survived more than once by pulling that one.

Can't find it now but there was a great article with MPs talking about the kind of stunts they used to pull in the commons back in the 1970s. On one occasion I'm almost certain (I think it was the nationalisation of British Aerospace or something.) Labour MPs broke agreed pairs to vote in favour. In the 1979 confidence vote, the Ulster Unionists openly tried to sell their votes for a gas pipeline.
>> No. 413402 Anonymous
25th October 2017
Wednesday 8:49 pm
413402 spacer
>>413401

At least he didn't drag a man from his deathbed to vote.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_vote_of_no_confidence_in_the_Callaghan_ministry
>> No. 413418 Anonymous
26th October 2017
Thursday 8:01 pm
413418 spacer
>>413402
tbh think it would've been kinder for the guy to do it, apparently he was devastated he could've saved the government and didn't get the chance.
>> No. 413437 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 9:21 am
413437 spacer
I wish I understood the politics that are being discussed in this thread. I feel like I fit into the category of being the racist pub drinker that has been mentioned twice.

Although not racist, I've been called it for moaning about the Muzzy kids that give me shit while I'm drinking a beer outside my local.

How do I get to the point where I can read through political discussion without being confused gents? Are there a list of books that political science or philosophy degree students have to read through and understand? I'd be happy to give them a tackle.

I didn't finish secondary school. I don't feel great about it.
>> No. 413440 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 11:00 am
413440 spacer
>>413437

I mean, just stop saying "muzzy" and you're on your way.
>> No. 413441 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 11:03 am
413441 spacer
>>413437

The most common degree for aspiring cabinet ministers is Politics, Philosophy and Economics at Oxford. At the link below, you can find the first year reading list. If you ask at your local library, they should be able to order you a copy of anything on that list. Alternatively, you may be able to download it from LibGen.

http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/sites/all/files/PPE%20New%20College%20freshers%20Reading%20List%202016_draft_word_14Apr2016.pdf

https://libgen.pw/

>I didn't finish secondary school. I don't feel great about it.

Don't feel bad about it, as it's almost certainly not your fault. You're clearly an intelligent and articulate person. Our education system does a really piss-poor job of helping bright kids who are struggling with difficult circumstances. Far too many talented people are allowed to slip through the cracks. I'm one of them - I became badly depressed in my teens and left school with a handful of bad GCSE grades. After spending years bouncing between crap jobs and the dole, I went to university at the age of 30. I was absolutely terrified at first, but I liked it so much that I went on to do a PhD.

If you're thinking about returning to education, have a look at the Open University or the Access to HE diploma. You can study part-time and it won't cost you anything up front.

http://www.open.ac.uk/

http://www.accesstohe.ac.uk/
>> No. 413442 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 11:10 am
413442 spacer
>>413437
Recognising you are uneducated and that you actually don't know better than the experts puts you far ahead of most. There's no shame in it.

But yeah if you don't want to be called racist stop expressing racist thought. You get shit from kids because they're kids, not because they are from eskimo families.
>> No. 413443 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 11:13 am
413443 spacer
>>413441
Actual Professor?
>> No. 413444 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 1:34 pm
413444 spacer
>>413437

>I've been called it for moaning about the Muzzy kids that give me shit while I'm drinking a beer outside my local.

>How do I get to the point where I can read through political discussion without being confused gents?


These two statements are not connected. And yes, Shamanism is a cancerous culture.
>> No. 413450 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 7:12 pm
413450 spacer
>>413440
I've got a bad habit of calling things silly nicknames. Didn't think it was too big of a deal. I'll give it a miss I guess.

>>413441
Incredible, I didn't expect such a nice and helpful response. Thanks a lot mate! I think I'm going to give this a full on go. Much appreciated! I've got a couple of Bob saved up so money shouldn't be a barrier in the short term. Brilliant stuff.

>>413442
In hindsight, I'm a fully grown man complaining about kids. Quite childish. I don't care about their race though. My whining isn't racist. They tend to sing songs mocking people who drink alcohol on their way home from school as they pass the pub. I enjoy a quite pint or 5 on payday, kills the mood a bit you know. And it's not something I can do frequently. I assumed the hostility came from Shamanismic teachings, parents maybe.

>>413444
So I've spent 20 minutes reading about actual shamanism, interesting stuff. Incredible related art.
>> No. 413452 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 7:13 pm
413452 spacer
MUD IN THEIR BLOOD
SHIT ON THEIR SKIN
THEY KNOCK ON OUR DOOR BUT WE WON'T LET THEM IN
>> No. 413453 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 7:17 pm
413453 spacer
>>413450
Adolescent kids are mostly dickheads, I don't know if you've noticed that or not?
>> No. 413454 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 8:05 pm
413454 spacer
>>413450
What kind of songs?
>> No. 413455 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 8:58 pm
413455 spacer
>>413452

You're thinking of Muk, the Pokemon, lad.
>> No. 413456 Anonymous
30th October 2017
Monday 9:08 pm
413456 spacer
>>413437
>I wish I understood the politics that are being discussed in this thread.

It's low-level academic politics and one lad is deliberately screaming for attention. Best not to worry yourself because it is 100% bollocks that not even the majority of students care about, which is probably why it's bollocks.

>Are there a list of books that political science or philosophy degree students have to read through and understand?

Try reading 'Justice: What's the right thing to do?' by Sandel. He writes in a pretty straightforward way and you avoid getting caught out by works everyone references but nobody has properly read out of laziness.

>>413441 is right about trying to OU. It is what I did before going into regular university and it was ace - turns out nobody else has any idea on what they're talking about either.

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password