General election 2024

[IdleRich]

This kind of disproportion is appropriate where votes are considered not only to represent individuals but the interests of the resources that are relevant to them e.g. areas with swathes of farming or protected land preclude high population but if the farmers or similar did not have an outsized say then the fate of the land would be decided by urbanites with no skin in the game nor awareness of its own interests, so to speak.

Some people think that, others disagree. Same with other potential changes that might make it fairer in the eyes of some. It doesn't matter though cos the Tories have the whip hand and they are implacaby opposed to any change. So if we vote then we have to vote in the system that ultimately the Tories are responsible for, if it does somehow contain some in-built racism then that's sad - though frankly that's the least of its problems - but whatever, the Tories insisted on the rules of the game and everyone else has to play buy them regardless of any biases of any kind in any direction and for any reason. Labour just have to play along, even if there is some massive racial basis in their favour built into it (which obviously there isn't) then that's out of their control.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Let's just clear up what you're saying here:

Black and Asian voters are apparently afflicted with unconscious racist bias against Sunak to an even greater degree than white voters have a conscious racist bias against him, it's just that they're too stupid to realise this and need you, Social Justice Warrior par excellence, to explain it to them.

Because Sunak's track record, and the performance of Conservative and Conservative-led governments over the last 14 years, have been so blemishless that only white supremacism is the only reason anyone could have for not supporting them is 'white supremacism', regardless of whether they're actually white or not.

Yes, it's been shown that POC can be white supremacists too, being influenced the dominant white culture.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Yes, it's been shown that POC can be white supremacists too, being influenced the dominant white culture.

If you're saying white voters oppose Sunak because he's dark skinned while non-white voters oppose him despite his dark skin, then your theory (such as it is) has no predictive power at all and is obviously useless.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

If you're saying white voters oppose Sunak because he's dark skinned while non-white voters oppose him despite his dark skin, then your theory (such as it is) has no predictive power at all and is obviously useless.

My theory totally predicts that, because there are 2 variables: white/colour and oppressor/oppressed. Your attempted appeal to a non-existent Asian supremacy shows that it's not a symmetrical state of affairs...white bias is intrinsically connected to ideas of essential superiority, fuelled by our colonial history. People of colour in Britain do not have the narrative of racial superiority that would justify colour suprematism; this is all explored in the literature on stereotype threat, in which people internalise messages from the oppressor culture that communicate their purported intrinsic inferiority...they become racist against themselves.

Starmer benefits from both of these dynamics: white supremacy and POC inferiority, with both camps being led by the nose through long inculcated narratives of power.

 

[Mr. Tea]

My theory totally predicts that, because there are 2 variables: white/colour and oppressor/oppressed. Your attempted appeal to a non-existent Asian supremacy shows that it's not a symmetrical state of affairs...white bias is intrinsically connected to ideas of essential superiority, fuelled by our colonial history. People of colour in Britain do not have the narrative of racial superiority that would justify colour suprematism; this is all explored in the literature on stereotype threat, in which people internalise messages from the oppressor culture that communicate their purported intrinsic inferiority...they become racist against themselves.

Starmer benefits from both of these dynamics: white supremacy and POC inferiority, with both camps being led by the nose through long inculcated narratives of power.

To repeat: you're supporting an ongoing genocide of non-white people by a country of mainly white people.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

To repeat: you're supporting an ongoing genocide of non-white people by a country of mainly white people.

I'm not supporting anything of the sort. In that thread I've been merely pointing out gross errors and omissions to help people escape their groupthink peer bubble.

As for genocide, if Israel had the same attitude to Palestine as Hamas does to Israel there would be literally no Palestinians left in Palestine right now.

 

[Mr. Tea]

I'm not supporting anything of the sort. In that thread I've been merely pointing out gross errors and omissions to help people escape their groupthink peer bubble.

As for genocide, if Israel had the same attitude to Palestine as Hamas does to Israel there would be literally no Palestinians left in Palestine right now.

Many Israelis have exactly that attitude.

But this false equivalence ignores the fact that Israel was created through the destruction of Palestine, not the other way round. Further, your support of Israel suggests you think each Israeli life is worth at least 25 Palestinian lives, given the current ratio of deaths on each side.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Many Israelis have exactly that attitude.

But this false equivalence ignores the fact that Israel was created through the destruction of Palestine, not the other way round. Further, your support of Israel suggests you think each Israeli life is worth at least 25 Palestinian lives, given the current ratio of deaths on each side.

Israel are trying to eliminate Hamas who pose an existential threat to them - i.e. both the state and all of the Jews in it - as well as committed one of the worst atrocities in history. Israel's tactics are unusually solicitous of Palestinian civilians' well-being, whereas Hamas are pursuing a sacrificial strategy that sees Palestinians as expendable. There is no definitive site for Israel or Palestine and their history goes back thousands of years, not that involves whoever is alive currently.

I don't know what you're going on about with your body count point. Just war requires a just cause - in this case eliminating Hamas who want to eliminate you and had a good go at it - and this cause doesn't become unjust once the winning side outkills the losing side. If we're fighting Hitler and we're just about to reach his bunker when we shoot the nazi who tips us into the lead the cause doesn't suddenly become unjust and it's the Nazis who are the good guys. The logic is asinine and basically means no-one can justly win.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Israel are trying to eliminate Hamas who pose an existential threat to them - i.e. both the state and all of the Jews in it - as well as committed one of the worst atrocities in history. Israel's tactics are unusually solicitous of Palestinian civilians' well-being, whereas Hamas are pursuing a sacrificial strategy that sees Palestinians as expendable. There is no definitive site for Israel or Palestine and their history goes back thousands of years, not that involves whoever is alive currently.

I don't know what you're going on about with your body count point. Just war requires a just cause - in this case eliminating Hamas who want to eliminate you and had a good go at it - and this cause doesn't become unjust once the winning side outkills the losing side. If we're fighting Hitler and we're just about to reach his bunker when we shoot the nazi who tips us into the lead the cause doesn't suddenly become unjust and it's the Nazis who are the good guys. The logic is asinine and basically means no-one can justly win.

Israel obviously represents a far greater threat to the Palestinians than the other way round, as the body count amply demonstrates. Hamas possess AK's and rudimentary rockets; Israel is armed by the world's only current military superpower and has nuclear weapons.

You know this, of course. You're just playing the dumb cunt for reasons best known to yourself.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Israel obviously represents a far greater threat to the Palestinians than the other way round, as the body count amply demonstrates. Hamas possess AK's and rudimentary rockets; Israel is armed by the world's only current military superpower and has nuclear weapons.

You know this, of course. You're just playing the dumb cunt for reasons best known to yourself.

Israel has no interest in massacring Palestinians, whereas Hamas has an interest in the converse. Israel is interested in Hamas and Hamas are not representative of Palestinian civilians so they are not even on the same side as it were. The body count, which is very low for a superpower supposedly hell-bent on genocide, is in large part due to Hamas pursuing a uniquely sacrificial strategy while fighting in cities rather than in the open and then including e.g. civilians that they themselves have killed through misfired rockets or by using them as human sandbags in their spurious statistics.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

It seems that the Green Party have plumped for the pleasure principle over the reality principle in deciding to endorse the antisemitic fever dream rather than face up to the pain of assuming a more objective view.

Greens endorse election candidates accused of ‘antisemitism’

The Green Party has endorsed prospective MPs revealed to have made comments supportive of Hamas and to have claimed October 7 was a ‘false flag’ operation

www.thetimes.com

 

[Mr. Tea]

Israel has no interest in massacring Palestinians

What, besides the fact that senior members of the Israeli government, military and media establishment, including Netanyahu himself, routinely describe Palestinians as vermin, pests and so on, namely non-human creatures that ought to be wiped out?

On Saturday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israelis were united in their fight against Hamas, whom he described as an enemy of incomparable cruelty. “They are committed to completely eliminating this evil from the world,” Netanyahu said in Hebrew. He then added: “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember.”

There are more than 23,000 verses in the Old Testament. The ones Netanyahu turned to, as Israeli forces launched their ground invasion in Gaza, are among its most violent—and have a long history of being used by Jews on the far right to justify killing Palestinians.

As others quickly pointed out, God commands King Saul in the first Book of Samuel to kill every person in Amalek, a rival nation to ancient Israel. “This is what the Lord Almighty says,” the prophet Samuel tells Saul. “‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”

The dangerous history behind Netanyahu's Amalek rhetoric

His recent biblical reference has long been used by the Israeli far right to justify killing Palestinians.

www.motherjones.com

Fighting “human animals.” Making Gaza a “slaughterhouse.” “Erasing the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth.”

Harsh Israeli rhetoric against Palestinians becomes central to South Africa's genocide case

Comments about fighting human animals, making Gaza a slaughterhouse, and erasing the Gaza Strip completely are key components of the case.

apnews.com

You don't need to take my word for it. You only have to listen to what Israelis themselves are saying.

 

[version]

Luke told me he's PUMPED, PSYCHED, and ECSTATIC about Labour's manifesto. He says it's the greatest manifesto he's ever seen.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

What, besides the fact that senior members of the Israeli government, military and media establishment, including Netanyahu himself, routinely describe Palestinians as vermin, pests and so on, namely non-human creatures that ought to be wiped out?

The dangerous history behind Netanyahu's Amalek rhetoric

His recent biblical reference has long been used by the Israeli far right to justify killing Palestinians.

www.motherjones.com

Harsh Israeli rhetoric against Palestinians becomes central to South Africa's genocide case

Comments about fighting human animals, making Gaza a slaughterhouse, and erasing the Gaza Strip completely are key components of the case.

apnews.com

You don't need to take my word for it. You only have to listen to what Israelis themselves are saying.

You're proving my point: they are talking about Hamas and you're pretending that the Palestinians are equivalent to Hamas - which is itself a libel - and thereby inflating what is even a conditional threat, to kill straight up terrorists unless they return their hostages, into surprise surprise a holocaust equalling 'genocide'.

To repeat, Israel are not carrying out a wholesale slaughter of civilians so it is not a genocide.

 

[Mr. Tea]

You're proving my point: they are talking about Hamas and you're pretending that the Palestinians are equivalent to Hamas - which is itself a libel - and thereby inflating what is even a conditional threat, to kill straight up terrorists unless they return their hostages, into surprise surprise a holocaust equalling 'genocide'.

To repeat, Israel are not carrying out a wholesale slaughter of civilians so it is not a genocide.

They're obviously talking about Gazans or Palestinians in general. The Amalekites were not a political party, were they? They were a nation. An ethnic group.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

They're obviously talking about Gazans or Palestinians in general. The Amalekites were not a political party, were they? They were a nation. An ethnic group.

Your supposedly revelatory quotation has the PM say 'Hamas' with the Amalek reference indicating how Hamas would be dealt with. But the fact the paranoiacs have to even reach for tenuous interpretations of isolated comments betrays that Israel's deeds are clearly not matching their haters' hype. Correspondence closed on the genocide point until Israel does something clearly aimed at large-scale killing of civilians rather than enemy forces or infrastructure i.e. when Israel does something anything like Hamas did.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Your supposedly revelatory quotation has the PM say 'Hamas' with the Amalek reference indicating how Hamas would be dealt with. But the fact the paranoiacs have to even reach for tenuous interpretations of isolated comments betrays that Israel's deeds are clearly not matching their haters' hype. Correspondence closed on the genocide point until Israel does something clearly aimed at large-scale killing of civilians rather than enemy forces or infrastructure i.e. when Israel does something anything like Hamas did.

He literally quoted a passage from the Bible about committing genocide against an entire nation, including women and children. And by Israel's own admission, they have killed far more women and children than they have fighting men (or men of any sort, for that matter).

The rhetoric matches the actions.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

'Palestinian Child Soldiers United Nations Watch is deeply concerned by Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas recruitment and use of Palestinian child soldiers in violation of international law, including inter alia the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and its Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict'

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Like most caught up in so-called 'activism' Tea has gone utterly to seed: can't understand nor integrate new or conflicting information, just repeats the same simple slogans ad nauseam.

 

[WashYourHands]

'Palestinian Child Soldiers United Nations Watch is deeply concerned by Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas recruitment and use of Palestinian child soldiers in violation of international law, including inter alia the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and its Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict'

‘Palestinian Child Soldiers’ is your kind of wet dream