- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:1000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 3257 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts][ Reply ]
1296 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 80531
I think it's time for a new Corbyn thread.
The previous thread (>>73072) is reaching critical mass. In combination with the original thread (>>64990) we've had over 4,700 posts on Dear Leader since August last year. That's a lot of shitposting. Keep up the good work, lads.
|>>|| No. 84187
>in my experience
i.e "I am talking out of my arse".
I've no particular dog in this fight because my social ethics lies so far outside of the norm as to make the boomer/millennial thing irrelevant to me. However, you can hardly blame today's young people for being slightly bitter- they have to work harder than anybody has done in generations, relatively speaking, but society simply refuses to acknowledge it. They're the generation that grew up through shopping centre hoody bans and ASBOs for congregating in groups of more than four, whereas their grandmas and grandads were getting trolleyed on pills and wrecking seaside resorts at the same age. They spend what should be their most carefree years sat at home fretting about their A-levels, and yet that older generation still has the audacity to call them spoiled.
Millennials are not averse to putting the work in, what stings for them is the fact nobody will jut hold their hands up and say "Fair's fair, you could buy a house on four month's wages in my day. Give them some credit."
|>>|| No. 84188
>I suppose I am privileged in the sense that I was fortunate enough that my parents instilled in my the importance of a good worth ethic and the value of education but I come from a poor background.
So you're more the deluded sort then? Got it.
>Whilst I won't have it as easy as my parents
That's not a "whilst", it's the crux of the problem. For a good few centuries now, every generation has had it better than their parents. From the beginnings of the industrial revolutions up to around the late 1980s, young adults came of age and would go on to enjoy better lives than the generation before. People born in the 1980s onwards, coming of age around the turn of the century, are the exception. They're the first generation to be worse off than their parents. The first generation to have to earn things their forebears were merely granted. The first generation to effectively have to justify their own existence while the rest of society pisses on them. The first generation, not this century, not for the past half-century, but all the way back to the fucking Georgians. The very fabric of the social contract is breaking apart.
Today's under-40s are the best behaved, most responsible, most productive, best educated, most tolerant and most forward-thinking generations in the history of this country. Their elders have repaid them by selling the family silver for a holiday home on the Costa Blanca and an end to Bloody Forrinuhs Roonin Are Cuntry.
>The report adds that scrapping free bus passes could cost the UK economy more than £1.7bn a year due to the likely decline in volunteering [...]
That isn't necessarily a bad thing. In many cases, they're doing work that really ought to be paid for, and this is one of the common arguments that gets raised against "workfare" schemes.
>the under-25s, who are more likely to be in good physical health, less likely to suffer from isolation and less likely to do voluntary work.
They're also more likely to be unemployed (as distinct from retired). God knows when I was that age and signing on the legwork would have been a lot less painful if it wasn't costing me £5 a day to get around.
|>>|| No. 84189
>Their elders have repaid them by selling the family silver for a holiday home on the Costa Blanca and an end to Bloody Forrinuhs Roonin Are Cuntry.
If young people didn't want to leave the European Union then they should have got off their arses and voted. The vote was won by a fine margin and the result could very easily have been different if the young had actually bothered to go out and vote instead of leaving it up to other people.
|>>|| No. 84191
While I agree with your sentiment, I'd like to point out it was getting trolleyed in forests and parks during my round and a group of us setting up a facebook event for protesting a shopping centres congregation rules was enough to trigger the owners to set up a meeting. Suppose those are good anecdotes for how a lot of millennials are.
|>>|| No. 84216
I can only assume he's on about the same amount of drugs as the otherlad who freaked out last week.
|>>|| No. 84283
Ken's finally gone. Shame he had to resign because Corbyn didn't have the balls to get rid of him.
|>>|| No. 84284
Oh is that how Labour Party disciplinary processes work? The leader has the ability to summarily expel people without an investigation or hearing?
Isn't it weird how people critical of Corbyn think he's too authoritarian one minute and not authoritarian enough the next?
|>>|| No. 84285
He was suspended over two years ago for very public comments. Over two years ago and it was only this week the NEC were to discuss it.
It was a massive failure of leadership for this not to have been resolved more quickly.
|>>|| No. 84286
>A tribute to the late Baroness Jowell has been disrupted by far-Left activists who broke a minute’s silence to protest against her association with Tony Blair and the Iraq War, The Telegraph has learned.
>Labour party members have called for an investigation after activists, believed to be affiliated with the campaign group Momentum, chose to interrupt a local constituency meeting on 16 May, just days after Baroness Jowell died of cancer.
>Members of Hampstead and Kilburn constituency Labour Party said they were shocked when a woman shouted that Baroness Jowell had voted to “murder a lot of people” by backing welfare reforms and she would not take part in the silence to respect her memory. A small group of Left-wing activists at the meeting then declined to take part.
>The silence was held to commemorate both her work on the national stage and as a Camden councillor between 1971 and 1986.
>The heckler appeared to pick out Baroness Jowell’s role as a close ally of Tony Blair and stalwart of New Labour. A source said: “There was quite a lot of heckling and one person shouted that Tessa Jowell had voted for murders of lots of people. They instead wanted to hold a minute’s silence for Gaza. It was pretty upsetting for people in the room who knew Tessa well as she had a lot of connections to the area and was a member of the constituency party when she was a councillor.”
The new kinder politics in action.
|>>|| No. 84288
I've sat through a minute's silence for a dead Tory for crying out loud, it doesn't mean you have to respect anything they stood for or did. Christ alive.
|>>|| No. 84289
Yes, but she was a Blairite. There's nothing these people loathe more than the Blairites.
Also, bringing up Gaza gives them an opportunity to continue their Jew hating obsession. Criticism of Israel is not in itself anti-Semitic, but there are people within Labour who like to criticise it a lot when they don't show the same level of concern for abuses by other nations in the Middle East, such as what's happening in Bahrain or Yemen.
|>>|| No. 84290
Japan on kitchen.jpg
>they don't show the same level of concern for abuses by other nations in the Middle East, such as what's happening in Bahrain or Yemen.
Your whataboutism is so bad I wonder if Mossad had their Psi-Ops budget cut.
|>>|| No. 84291
>He was suspended over two years ago for very public comments. Over two years ago and it was only this week the NEC were to discuss it.
That's not accurate at all. He was provisionally suspended two years ago (within hours of making the original Hitler remarks, by the way), and the NCC met last year (they only meet once a year) and ruled that he wouldn't be expelled, but be given a two year suspension. Taking into account the time he'd already been suspended for, that was due to run out earlier this year. Then, in light of the fact that he publicly stood by his original remarks, his suspension was provisionally extended, and he was due to see the NCC again.
>It was a massive failure of leadership for this not to have been resolved more quickly.
Disciplinary procedures really aren't up to the leadership.
|>>|| No. 84292
A noticeable number of people, particularly those on the left or within the Labour party, are disproportionately critical of Israel when compared with other nations committing similar atrocities.
It's almost as if there's a hidden agenda. If I started criticising the likes of the WASPI movement or content on Jezebel then that wouldn't necessarily mean I had a problem with women. However, if I was preoccupied with criticising them whilst giving male oriented things of a similar calibre a free pass then people would start suspecting I was a misogynist.
Now what could it be about Israel that sets it apart for particular vitriol?
|>>|| No. 84293
You don't think Israel is a prominent concern due to the apparent exceptionalism it is subject to?
I couldn't give a fuck about which ancient desert tribe did what to which other ancient desert tribe, but from a pleb's perspective it just seems like Israel does things other nations would be tried for warcrimes over every other week and anyone who seems to notice that is an anti-semite.
I don't want to start suggesting there is one, but I mean it doesn't exactly help dispel the idea of an international Jewish conspiracy, does it.
|>>|| No. 84294
I don't think the list of countries which claim to be a bastion of democracy and civil rights despite operating an apartheid regime, to which Britain's strategic interests are allied, to which Britain sells millions in arms annually, etc. is especially long.
|>>|| No. 84295
There's enough similar candidates in that neck of the woods. For example, the Saudi blockade in Yemen and subsequent famine and cholera outbreak has to be up there in the dickish stakes yet the calls for the Yemen to be liberalised aren't anywhere near the same level as Free Palestine.
Don't get me wrong, Israel the nation state is a monumental cunt. However, when people get fixated on criticising Israel to this extent it does indicate an ulterior motive at play.
|>>|| No. 84296
>from a pleb's perspective it just seems like Israel does things other nations would be tried for warcrimes over every other week
I think you're forgetting that Saudi Arabia does the same sort of thing. I mean, in fairly recent history they were actual state supporters of terror.
|>>|| No. 84297
Consider Saudi Arabia. It's a totalitarian regime. It beheaded 150 of its own citizens last year, many of them on trumped-up charges of "terrorism" for speaking out against the regime. It's fighting a war in Yemen of very questionable legality; several international organisations have accused Saudi Arabia of deliberately targeting civilians. We've sold them £3.3bn worth of arms since that war began. On his visit to the UK this March, crown prince Mohammad bin Salman was warmly received by Theresa May and signed a £65bn trade deal.
We have no morals, only strategic interests.
|>>|| No. 84298
Strategic interests is a perfectly valid card to play. Especially when the alternative is the Americans receiving money for the exact same product as that which is controversial. Relevant ex defence industry.
|>>|| No. 84299
The left are, of course, famously reluctant to criticise Saudi Arabia.
|>>|| No. 84300
Do you think that might have something to do with the fact that the Saudi intervention in Yemen is a few years old, compared to the decades that the Israeli occupation of Palestine has been going on for?
|>>|| No. 84301
The key difference being you can call Saudi Arabia the backward shithole it is without getting suspended from the Labour party.
|>>|| No. 84302
>in fairly recent history they were actual state supporters of terror
Is that why they get along so well with Britain then?
|>>|| No. 84303
In Palestine is there 17 million people starving and over 1 million people with cholera? Besides, the Saudis weren't exactly classed as a great bunch of lads before the blockade
If you're the type of person to disrupt a minute's silence for Tessa Jowell, organised by people who knew her personally from her days in the CLP, because you think it'd be more worthy to have one for Gaza instead then there's a reasonable chance you're a latent anti-Semite.
|>>|| No. 84304
It's not a contest of who's suffering more, mate, the point is that there are dedicated pro-Palestinian campaigners and groups, the issues have been well publicised, and it's been an ongoing concern for half a century. That's why it continues to be a high profile issue. Please do us all a favour and give the whataboutery a rest.
|>>|| No. 84305
We come back to the point made by >>84292. The Parliamentary Labour Party has a "Friends of Palestine & the Middle East" group with 129 members. This group almost exclusively talks about Israel and Palestine. I could only be bothered to go through the last five pages of their "updates" feed, but every single one of them was about Israel and Palestine. In their list of Early Day Motions, Parliamentary questions and debates, every single one was about Israel and Palestine.
I'm not saying that Israel's treatment of the Palestinian people is anything less than a grotesque abuse of human rights, but when a political party seems overwhelmingly concerned with the human rights of one particular group of Arabs, it starts to look a bit suspicious. Even if the Labour party are unimpeachable with respect to anti-Semitism, they need to do something about the optics.
|>>|| No. 84306
I wonder if people in the 80s whinged about anti-Afrikaner bias on the left.
|>>|| No. 84307
We were definitely moaning about Labour politicians hailing any post-imperial leader as a glorious freedom fighter.
|>>|| No. 84308
Personally I'd rather they kept pushing for an end to those grotesque human rights abuses, even if they do risk appearing "a bit suspicious", but that's just me.
|>>|| No. 84309
I really loathe the way this image of Corbyn gets bandied about.
All it really proves is that Corbyn was associating with questionable people back in the eighties.
|>>|| No. 84311
In 1984 the police moved to get rid of a non-stop picket outside of the South African embassy organised by the Anti-Apartheid Movement ahead of the visit by Botha.
The Anti-Apartheid Movement decided to challenge this in the courts. The City of London branch of AAM, which had a reputation for infantile stunts and nasty behaviour that ultimately led them to be expelled from the organisation, decided to demonstrate outside of the embassy whilst the challenge was going through the courts. The AAM made clear to the City of London branch that they didn't want the demo to go ahead, especially as it could undermine the court case, but they went and did it anyway.
The City of London branch at the time was largely populated by the Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein financed Workers Revolutionary Party, later exposed as a cult and of spying on people on behalf of the aforementioned dictators, and the Revolutionary Communist Group who had a penchant for the PAC phrase of "one settler, one bullet".
There you have Jeremy Corbyn in a nutshell. Associating with people with dubious reputations and being more interested in rabble rousing protests than being pragmatic and trying to get things resolved. Judging by his behaviour as leader, giving the impression that he wants to be the party of permanent protest rather than the party of government, he hasn't moved on from his level of sixth form student politics.
|>>|| No. 84313
Actually somewhat impressive that you wrote that much without ever coming close to stating a fact.
For one thing, the non-stop picket didn't start until 1986. The picket ahead of Botha's visit was a different matter, and happened prior to City Group's affiliation with the national Anti-apartheid movement ended (which happened because they staged events outside the boundaries of the city of London).
Also, there was no challenge going through the courts. The national AAM agreed with the police on a ban on protesting outside the embassy in order to avoid confrontation, and they did so without being compelled by legal action. City Group defied the example of the national AAM, staged a picket and had dozens of demonstrators arrested. It was only after one of the City group arrestees (Richard Roques) went to court as a test case that the ban was found to be illegal.
|>>|| No. 84314
new Labour was terrible. not for any of your normal boring policy reasons or because of this or that stupid war or failure to nationalise the trains, you wanna know why it was terrible? because it's an inferior tribute act to Australian Labor in the 80s. We even copy-and-pasted the Kirribilli agreement into the Granita pact. Except while Tony Blair was weird, mildly unsettling and had a spectacular fall from grace, Bob Hawke was actually a cool real person and people still like him, and while Brown was a complete liability Paul Keating went on to deliver A VICTORY FOR THE TRUE BELIEVERS. Once you actually know this story, all the pretence about doing something new, modern and world-leading goes out the window. We didn't produce a third way or any of the nonsense synthesis of rights and responsibilities New Labour tediously tried to signal they were doing. We produced a massively inferior counterfeit of a product from an ex-colony that still exports things they've dug up out of the ground.
>Now what could it be about Israel that sets it apart for particular vitriol?
You're hinting it's the Jew thing, which misses what it really is.
There was a wonderful article somewhere - I'm too lazy to find it since it's probably long gone - which went on about this. The thing is, Israel isn't important in itself but Israel is tied to everything else. Back the unification of Ireland? You're also pro-palestine. Ulster Unionist? You'll also be flying an Israeli flag then. Blairite? Well, naturally you'll be on Israel's side too. Celtic football club supporter? Palestine. Pepsi? Israel. Cola? Palestine. everything.
It's all heuristic politics. Theoretically there's no reason you couldn't think the Iraq War was legal and good while also being a communist, but if you start defending the Iraq war the immediate - and generally accurate assumption - is that you're of a Blair-y-Cameron-y persuasion. Israel is just the contentious centre point for this. (You could even go further - pro-Iraq war? Israel. Anti? Palestine.) Even if you don't hold these views, why would you make a fuss? If I can get people to back my economic policies by ranting about a land dispute a thousand miles away, why wouldn't I do it?
Every party also has a "Friends of Israel" group. You can easily run this the other way and go "Isn't it suspicious there are so many pro-Israel organisations? HMM almost like they DO have unreasonable influence." (And yeah, that's also bad optics, and yeah, that's also tied into heuristic nonsense. Basically it's a worse hill to die on than the Golan Heights)
>Workers Revolutionary Party, later exposed as a cult and of spying on people on behalf of the aforementioned dictators
hahaha, imagine taking a bunch of trotskyist actors LARPing seriously.
>he hasn't moved on from his level of sixth form student politics.
And you'll be a well adjusted bloke who's moved on from 1997, right?
|>>|| No. 84315
> And you'll be a well adjusted bloke who's moved on from 1997, right?
Not him but Blair is my fucking Nixon and I won't sleep until I see the cunt's corpse burnt in a fucking skip.
|>>|| No. 84316
Weird hypocrisy to say speculating about Israel's influence is "bad optics" immediately after an extended essay on how literally every political issue is related to it in some way? What, climate change? Pinochet? The Common Agricultural Policy? The Vietnam War? Transgender rights?
|>>|| No. 84317
None of those issues are actually related. It's just a quick and easy way of getting into a scrap. More likely than Mossad going out and paying people to associate Israel with a chronic inability to realise the 1990s have ended, the connection has evolved organically as people (a) project their own situation onto a foreign conflict, (b) make alliances of convenience, (c) try to attract a wider audience, and so on.
Alright, you've got me. (Although on methods of control, Israel = Market Solutions, Palestine = Ban things.)
Vague apologia oh arresting him is just left revenge fantasy wasn't Allende a bugger: Israel
Under no circumstnaces should he ever have existed Allende should've gone full tankie: Palestine
>The Common Agricultural Policy?
1970s-Early 1980s: Anti = Palestine, Pro = Israel
Now: lol who still talks about the CAP oh no where did all the farms go
>The Vietnam War?
Irrelevant bringing up of haha america got beat: Palestine
tactfully avoiding occasionally TERF-y: Israel
|>>|| No. 84318
I'm not sure what you're trying to do here; you seem to be bringing up the differing opinions of people who live in Israel and Palestine and their supporters, and then concluding that means everything comes back to Israel-Palestine. Isn't it more likely that these are divisions roughly along, oh I don't know, left and right-wing lines?
|>>|| No. 84319
It seems even trying to skirt the issue, Israel/Palestine remains a hill we're obligated to die on.
My conclusion is that because Israel-Palestine is a shibboleth for so many other positions, Israel receives a disproportionate amount of vitriol (And apologia!)
>left and right-wing lines?
Not quite so neatly. Support for Israel is often a boring centrist/"establishment" position. (And perhaps historically, around oil-crisis-y times, pretending to support the Arabs likewise.)
|>>|| No. 84323
Was looking for a definition rather than a video of some teenlad mocking people funnier than him for five minutes.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]