Page 62 of 70 FirstFirst ... 12526061626364 ... LastLast
Results 916 to 930 of 1038

Thread: UK EU Referendum Aftermath

  1. #916
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,942

    Default

    How do people feel about this? - https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...753858561.html

    Those who do not think the rising threats of political violence, strident nationalism, attempts to bypass parliamentary institutions and increasing nastiness towards minorities do not indicate the beginning of a turn towards fascism must ask themselves...

    ...what would? The way fascism manifested itself in the 1920s and 1930s was not the only way it can manifest itself.

    Fascism does not only exist in black and white photos and Pathe news reels.

    The nastiness adapts to new promising environments. Think, for example, of the independent institutions which extreme "will of the people" Brexiters have sought to trash:

    - parliamentary "saboteurs"
    - judicial "enemies of the people"
    - civil service "traitors"

    Even demanding letters to universities.

    This cannot be healthy. There is no value whatsoever in "taking back control" if the cost of Brexit is to trash the very domestic institutions - parliament, judiciary, civil service - which we would require to function more than ever outside the EU. Look at the casual trashing of human rights law and legal aid.

    The primary purposes of human rights law and legal aid is to support the individual against the coercive power of law.

    Without them an individual is powerless in the last resort against the State. And look at the routine casual insults and nastiness regarding Jewish people, Muslims, trans people.

    Attacks on LGBT education.

    And recall the first books to be burned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instit...chaft#Nazi_era

    Lots of "others" to be de-humanised, despised, mocked. Look at all this - the attacks on independent institutions, the attacks on legal aid and human rights law, the attacks on the "easy" targets of minorities, and ask yourself...

    ...what would a rise of fascism not look like in 2019?

  2. #917
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,942

    Default

    Someone posted a particularly unsettling excerpt from Eco's essay on "Ur-Fascism" in response:

    Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say. In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view – one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. To have a good instance of qualitative populism we no longer need the Piazza Venezia in Rome or the Nuremberg Stadium. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to version For This Useful Post:


  4. #918
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    لندورا
    Posts
    3,205

    Default


  5. The Following User Says Thank You to sufi For This Useful Post:


  6. #919
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,573

    Default

    Not really Brexit related - except that everything that happens in Britain is Brexit-related now - but Gavin Williamson has been sacked for leaking from the National Security Council meeting, or possibly he's been sacked for not cooperating with the enquiry into who leaked and doing it in a suspicious manner. Anyway, he's still saying that he didn't leak and he did cooperate but I say "fuck off you twunt".

  7. #920
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    17,069

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IdleRich View Post
    Not really Brexit related - except that everything that happens in Britain is Brexit-related now - but Gavin Williamson has been sacked for leaking from the National Security Council meeting, or possibly he's been sacked for not cooperating with the enquiry into who leaked and doing it in a suspicious manner. Anyway, he's still saying that he didn't leak and he did cooperate but I say "fuck off you twunt".
    https://twitter.com/davidschneider/s...810438656?s=19
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  8. #921
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,573

    Default

    I really can't make up my mind what happened here was it...
    a) That wanker (and he is a wanker) Williamson leaked from the meeting, got caught and fired and now his bleating about how it wasn't him and him swearing on his kids' lives is just more bollocks from a master of the art
    b) For once Williamson is telling the truth. He wasn't guilty and has been bounced out by an investigation that wasn't thorough or official. The level of investigation was chosen deliberately in that it's official enough to fire him but not official enough that he can appeal or even complain about the process.
    The vehemence of his denials almost have me veering towards the latter. It does kinda seem that there is something funny going on. Fucking tories.

  9. #922
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,573

    Default

    Tom Watson:

    In response to receiving the most brutal sacking I can think of [Williamson] has protested his innocence. Therefore this matter cannot be, as the prime minister says, closed.
    The essential point here is the prime minister has sacked the secretary of state for Defence because she believes there is compelling evidence that he has committed a crime. But despite that, she does not believe he should face a criminal investigation - where is the justice in that?
    In what world is it acceptable that the prime minister should be the arbiter of whether a politician she believes is guilty of criminal conduct in office should face a criminal investigation?

  10. #923
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,573

    Default

    Some Tory:

    Outside this house [Williamson] is being called a liar. And inside this house a number of honourable members have implied as much. Natural justice demands that the evidence be produced so that his reputation can be salvaged or utterly destroyed, doesn’t it?
    I agree with all this.
    Last edited by IdleRich; 02-05-2019 at 12:52 PM.

  11. #924
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    17,069

    Default

    The only thing I can think of is that sacking him but failing to provide actual evidence that could be used in a prosecution is being used as a cover-up for something potentially even more damaging to the government than the defence secretary leaking sensitive information to a national newspaper.

    Still, at least he's got that career as a matinee idol to fall back on.
    Last edited by Mr. Tea; 02-05-2019 at 05:24 PM.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  12. #925
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,573

    Default

    Well, exactly, something even more damaging....
    Then again, when GW says this

    "he would like a police investigation but has no mechanism by which to force one. He told me an investigation would exonerate him because "the reporter's notepad would show that I didn't say anything" and PM would offer an apology"
    It's kinda convenient no?

  13. #926
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,942

    Default

    I doubt his reputation would be "utterly destroyed", Liam Fox is the current Secretary of State for International Trade and Priti Patel is doing alright.

  14. #927
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,573

    Default

    There seems to be a kind of consensus of opinion that his actions are somehow worse than those of all the other scumbags in the government at the moment. When you combine that with the fact that we're expected to just accept it as true, whereas with (for example) Liam "the shit" Fox he was caught bang to rights and has never contested his guilt (cos he was guilty as sin) you can see why Williamson might feel aggrieved. Basically he's been convicted of a more serious crime with a much lower level of evidence. Or at least, that's one way of seeing it and that's definitely his version of events.

  15. #928
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,942

    Default

    I wouldn't be surprised if he did it, but it feels like it runs a bit deeper and somebody has it in for him.

  16. #929
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,573

    Default

    That's my thinking too... although maybe I just want that to be true and there to be yet more hilarious infighting in the Tory ranks.
    Put it this way though, if it actually was him and yet he is still protesting his innocence all over the shop, swearing up and down that he didn't and would never do it... then he really is more of a wrong 'un than I previously thought. To say the least.

  17. #930
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Who do you think is orchestrating this if that's the case?

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Kloss For This Useful Post:


Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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