Jeremy Corbyn

[Mr. Tea]

Tea, you've been flinging ad hominems around for the last three pages.

Huh? I've dissed a couple of journalists who, as far as I know, don't post on this forum. I haven't insulted you. You've called firefinga ignorant and me a baby.

And I've made my argument that there are prominent figures on the hard left who are obsessed with the misdeeds of Western governments to the point that they end up apologizing for, if not actively supporting, highly reactionary states and non-state groups just because they also oppose "The West". You clearly don't agree but it's not "incoherent" and it's a position shared by a great many people, not all of whom are bellicose neocons or messianic liberal-interventionists, as much as you might like to imagine they are.

 

[droid]

'Genocide top trumps'? Do you even know what you're doing? Do you understand that you can commit an ad hominem fallacy without directing it at the person you're speaking to?

Everything I've read by him makes him sound like the sort of notionally anti-war journalist who in fact just fucking loves war, because the more chaos and misery...

Ad Hominem, not even an attempt to back it up with evidence.

Putin's programme to re-establish the Soviet empire... ....And every other bad thing happening in the world is the fault of Israel, obviously.

Ad Hominem, Straw man, Willful Misrepresentation, Assertion without evidence.

I'm interested in what you mean by "federalism", and also "a Finland-style solution" - presumably you mean a brutal war for the survival of their country against a Soviet invasion?... Now that is what I call Realpolitik! "Sorry Lithuania, Poland, Romania: Uncle Sam has his 'back yard', Uncle Joe has his, and you quite clearly fall into the latter."

Wilful Misrepresentation, Straw man, Borderline Ad Hominem.

You've called firefinga ignorant and me a baby.

Is it still an insult if its true?

 

[Sectionfive]

This is all besides the point anyway. It's not Milne's or even Corbyn's opinions per say that are making people shit the bed. There are hundreds of people of with odious views and dubious pedigree in positions of power and influence that these people would never utter a word about. There was none of this posturing when Andy Coulson walked straight out of Murdoch's arse and into Downing street, for example. Look how long the hacking stuff was ignored before people were forced to acknowledge it. It's not Seumas Milne's press ethics they are worried about.

The press and wider bubble are losing the rag because there is a loss of certainty that comes with having your worldview challenged in the way it has been by Corbyn's elections. Not a single one of these people paid to hang around Westminster all day getting selfies at the number 10 xmas party predicted it would happen. All this shitting on about Putin and the IRA is just cover for the same old turf wars and the in gang are in meltdown having grown too comfortable having it their own way.

 

[droid]

Indeed.

In fact, Id say Milne's appointment was primarily pragmatic - he knows the media, obvs has contacts in the industry. The fact that he shares Corbyn's politics is mostly incidental, and is a symbol of trust more than anything else.

 

[craner]

There was none of this posturing when Andy Coulson walked straight out of Murdoch's arse and into Downing street

Are you mad? Everybody was talking about Coulson's murky past right off the bat. It was a controversial and risky appointment from Day 1 of the Coalition. Everybody knew it would end badly and constantly talked and wrote about how badly it would end. Then it ended badly.

In fact, Id say Milne's appointment was primarily pragmatic - he knows the media, obvs has contacts in the industry

This is just wilfully obtuse. I mean, what you're saying is true, he will have impeccable left-wing media contacts, but it is also blantantly (and successfully) a political and even iconoclastic appointment. Milne is an important and in some ways symbolic precense in the Corbyn world for, as much as anything, his investigative work into the fight against the NUM.

 

[Sectionfive]

Are you mad? Everybody was talking about Coulson's murky past right off the bat. It was a controversial and risky appointment from Day 1 of the Coalition. Everybody knew it would end badly and constantly talked and wrote about how badly it would end. Then it ended badly.

sure but nothing approaching the sort shrill baying hysteria from every angle we are seeing at the moment

 

[droid]

This is just wilfully obtuse. I mean, what you're saying is true, he will have impeccable left-wing media contacts, but it is also blantantly (and successfully) a political and even iconoclastic appointment. Milne is an important and in some ways symbolic precense in the Corbyn world for, as much as anything, his investigative work into the fight against the NUM.

Also pragmatic in the sense that the field of potential candidates would have been absolutely down to about two, and I don't think monbiot would have taken the job.

 

[droid]

sure but nothing approaching the sort shrill baying hysteria from every angle we are seeing at the moment

That Bullough article is a good example actually.

"I wanted to believe in David Cameron, but the appointment of Andy Coulson has shattered my dreams"

 

[Sectionfive]

We're in for five years of this basically. Everyone writing their own personal 60,000 word rationalisation of why they will be lining up behind Boris with a clear conscience.

"Look I'm a reasonable honest ordinary lefty bloke but there comes time when you have to use the brain instead the heart and admit that we just can't afford the NHS, after all sometimes the best medicine is the hardest to swallow"

" I used to believe in trade unions, in my heart I still do, but y'know who needs old fashioned workers rights in the nightmarish silicon valley owned G4s run death pit we have to work eighteen hours a day in now"

"Why twitter trolls mean we should invade Russia: Aren't I brave for speaking out against the politically correct Islamofascist corbynites who would silence me"


yada yada yada.

 

[Mr. Tea]

'Genocide top trumps'? Do you even know what you're doing? Do you understand that you can commit an ad hominem fallacy without directing it at the person you're speaking to?

"You're shit" is ad-hominem, "Your argument is shit" isn't. It's really pretty straightforward. And as far as slinging insults at people involved in this thread goes, you're the only one doing it. Why you're taking issue with me saying mean things about a couple of guys you don't know and (AFAIK) have no personal affection for, I don't know. Especially when I've explained in some depth why I have the problem with them that I do.

And genocide top trumps is precisely what you were doing. firefinga was talking about countries that were invaded, attacked or otherwise meddled with by the USSR in the context of why some of those countries might justifiably be worried about Putin flexing his muscles - you then leapt into "Yeahbutwhatabout..." mode and started banging on about the Vietnam war! If I wanted to play that game I could have mentioned the Holodomor, which is a damn sight more relevant to a discussion of Russian aggression in eastern Europe than Vietnam is.

 

[Mr. Tea]

We're in for five years of this basically. Everyone writing their own personal 60,000 word rationalisation of why they will be lining up behind Boris with a clear conscience.

"Look I'm a reasonable honest ordinary lefty bloke but there comes time when you have to use the brain instead the heart and admit that we just can't afford the NHS, after all sometimes the best medicine is the hardest to swallow"

" I used to believe in trade unions, in my heart I still do, but y'know who needs old fashioned workers rights in the nightmarish silicon valley owned G4s run death pit we have to work eighteen hours a day in now"

"Why twitter trolls mean we should invade Russia: Aren't I brave for speaking out against the politically correct Islamofascist corbynites who would silence me"


yada yada yada.

Haha, who is this fictional turncoat hate-puppet supposed to represent, apart perhaps from Nick Cohen? At this juncture I'm pretty sure no-one who would bother even trying to pretend to be a "lefty" would remotely consider voting for the shower of cunts currently ruining this country, whether led by Totes Ledge Bants Johnson or anyone else. The Tories-at-heart still carrying a torch for Blair, who maybe gave Labour "one last chance" in 2010, already defected to the Conservatives in their droves in this year's election.

Personally I think appointing someone as blatantly partisan as Milne as his comms bod is a mistake for Corbyn, and I hope it doesn't prove too costly for him. Making a militant vegan who wants to treat meat like a harmful, addictive drug his farming minister wasn't the smartest move either. But really these are side issues - most of his ideas about the economy, the welfare state and so on seem pretty sound and I'm still planning to vote for him.

 

[droid]

"You're shit" is ad-hominem, "Your argument is shit" isn't. It's really pretty straightforward. And as far as slinging insults at people involved in this thread goes, you're the only one doing. Why you're taking issue with me saying mean things about a couple of guys you don't know and (AFAIK) have no personal affection for, I don't know. Especially when I've explained in some depth why I have the problem with them that I do.

Im taking issue with the fact that you're seemingly now incapable of constructing an argument without resort to endless logical fallacies. Its a regression.

And genocide top trumps is precisely what you were doing. firefinga was talking about countries that were invaded, attacked or otherwise meddled with by the USSR in the context of why some of those countries might justifiably be worried about Putin flexing his muscles - you then leapt into "Yeahbutwhatabout..." mode and started banging on about the Vietnam war! If I wanted to play that game I could have mentioned the Holodomor, which is a damn sight more relevant to a discussion of Russian aggression in eastern Europe than Vietnam is.

Another distortion. I actually said that Russia was, historically, comparatively restrained compared to the US. Firefinga then said "Yeahbutwhatabout..." and I responded with a comparison of the two, yknow - comparatively.

Here's exactly what I said:

Its a simple matter to compare the historical record from 1945 on, or certainly post Korea. No matter how you swing it, the USSR was a model of restraint IN COMPARISON (before you say it) to a rampant, provocative US and NATO. had the shoe been on the other foot we all would have died in a nuclear hellstorm sometime in the 80's if not sooner.

So you cant talk about the Holdomer all you want, it's another attempt at distraction and has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made.

 

[Sectionfive]

Haha, who is this fictional turncoat hate-puppet supposed to represent,

All of them, they're all coming out as Tories by 2020. Not full tories mind, just realistic pragmatism, you see. Some may hang on to fill the place vacated by departing pet Blairites. Someone has to churn out the "why the left must.." columns but many, despite their "solid working class background", the youngest of eighteen children raised by a single mum inside a miners shirt pocket, despite not having written anything positive about the left in two decades will, after much soul searching, being hopping straight aboard the aspiration train. The fact that their haters and Chilcot won't shut up about that bloody war will push a few more over the edge.

 

[craner]

The fact that their haters and Chilcot won't shut up about that bloody war

Wait, I thought Chilcot was the bad guy, because he hasn't released his 2-million word report when everybody stamped their feet and demanded he do so?

Personally I think appointing someone as blatantly partisan as Milne as his comms bod is a mistake for Corbyn, and I hope it doesn't prove too costly for him.

I do.

 

[droid]

Wait, I thought Chilcot was the bad guy, because he hasn't released his 2-million word report when everybody stamped their feet and demanded he do so?

Getting worried? Are you mentioned in there somewhere?

 

[baboon2004]

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/oct/30/martin-amis-jeremy-corbyn-humour-jonathan-coe

Maritn Amis displaying his famous sense of irony.

 

[Mr. Tea]

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/oct/30/martin-amis-jeremy-corbyn-humour-jonathan-coe

Maritn Amis displaying his famous sense of irony.

Does anyone other than Martin Amis listen to Martin Amis these days?

 

[vimothy]

I recently discovered that Seamus Milne is the son of the late Alasdair Milne, former Director-General of the BBC.

 

[comelately]

"You're shit" is ad-hominem, "Your argument is shit" isn't. It's really pretty straightforward.

And a hearty lol at this, coming from someone who'd prefer to play Genocide Top Trumps.

1. Saying 'Your argument is shit' may not ad hominem, but it remains pretty fallacious and uncivil.

2. When you are questioning someone's motives for making an argument, as you have clearly done, then many would consider this an ad hominem (see the wikipedia entry). Others might prefer to list that as a separate fallacy of relevance, but it's all pretty similar stuff.

 

[Slothrop]

"Jeremy Corbyn supports terrorists. The papers say so."
"That's blatant misrepresentation."
"Yeah, but the papers also say that if he was More Statesmanlike and Knew How To Handle The Media then they wouldn't be able to blatantly misrepresent him. And you can't be a good leader without being Statesmanlike and Knowing How To Handle The Media."

Repeat x 1,000,000.

This conversation is seriously doing my head in right now.