All things Labour Party

[Lord Duckhunter]

I notice that YouGov has Corbyn's polling lead falling around his anti-single market comments.

 

As he continues to squander the momentum he gained from the election, the weird thing about him is that he seems intent on squandering it the most on Europe. While other senior Labour figures continue an unsustainable fudge, he's come out strongly against membership of either the single market or the customs union.

 

The reason it's weird is that, on this issue, Corbyn is no Corbynista. He's a Chavismo. The vast majority of his acolytes are committed to retaining membership, largely, I suspect, because the economic damage of hard Brexit is recognised even by them as far too great. As a Chavismo, however, Corbyn buys into the core Hugo Chavez belief that the EU is a neo-liberal conspiracy against the poor. He votes against joining the EEC, against joining the single market, against Maastricht, and against Lisbon -

 

 

This is why, for example, in Germany and France, wages for working class citizens are higher, working and living conditions are better, and health is better.

 

Pony

 

How is youth unemployment in France. How is it in Spain, what about Greece, how are living & working conditions there.

 

Tony Benn shaped his anti EU beliefs, because the left always believed your beloved EU to be anti democratic and designed to support the bosses. Germany & the rich have benefited from the EU. You can't seriously look at what it's done to the Greeks & try & claim the moral high ground.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[OldNick]

I notice that YouGov has Corbyn's polling lead falling around his anti-single market comments.

 

As he continues to squander the momentum he gained from the election, the weird thing about him is that he seems intent on squandering it the most on Europe. While other senior Labour figures continue an unsustainable fudge, he's come out strongly against membership of either the single market or the customs union.

 

The reason it's weird is that, on this issue, Corbyn is no Corbynista. He's a Chavismo. The vast majority of his acolytes are committed to retaining membership, largely, I suspect, because the economic damage of hard Brexit is recognised even by them as far too great. As a Chavismo, however, Corbyn buys into the core Hugo Chavez belief that the EU is a neo-liberal conspiracy against the poor. He votes against joining the EEC, against joining the single market, against Maastricht, and against Lisbon - against anything to with the EU.

 

Not surprisingly, Corbyn is wrong, of course. Dangerously so. The EU is the diametric opposite of 'neo-liberal' - ordoliberal. The central tenet of neo-liberalism is the minimal state. Ordoliberalism is the management of the market for the best outcome for the majority - a kind of state-regulated utilitarianism. This is why, for example, in Germany and France, wages for working class citizens are higher, working and living conditions are better, and health is better.

 

Corbyn doesn't see any of this, evidently. All he sees, Chavez style, is the conspiracy. So he won't be changing tack on membership any time soon. Watch his numbers continue to drop as his own members and Labour voters despair, even while the Tories continue, on Brexit and everything else, to offer the worst example of governance since Chamberlain.

If we are in the EU Corbyn is not able by law to re nationalise.

As for the Tories bad governance, surely they are following the democratic vote of exiting the EU. I don't like the result but you have to accept the majority view. The vote was basically worded in or out. I argued and tried to tellpeople what it all meant and early doors put a link showing the mess and terms we would be up against, but people didn't listen

[Verbal]

Pony

 

How is youth unemployment in France. How is it in Spain, what about Greece, how are living & working conditions there.

 

Tony Benn shaped his anti EU beliefs, because the left always believed your beloved EU to be anti democratic and designed to support the bosses. Germany & the rich have benefited from the EU. You can't seriously look at what it's done to the Greeks & try & claim the moral high ground.

 

Gawd luv us, Lord 'Chicks' Pony is back in the manor. Would his ponyship care to comment on the matters raised rather than this pointless rabbit?

[Lord Duckhunter]

I argued and tried to tellpeople what it all meant and early doors put a link showing the mess and terms we would be up against, but people didn't listen

 

This is one thing your side of the argument can't get your head round. We were told of the complicated nature of the deal, the "damage" it would do to the economy. Warned of a recession, emergency budget. Warned by POTUS, the IMF, OBR, CBI, Government, official opposition, The Scottish Government, The EU and guess what? People didn't care, or didn't believe you. It was your side that said categorically that we were voting to leave the SM & CM. Why are they re hashing the same arguments now, we heard you the first time.

 

So you're wrong,people did listen to what you said. They still preferred to leave

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited 27 July, 2017 by Lord Duckhunter

[Sour Mash]

Anyone following the Labour Party conference?

 

How that shambles ever got even remotely close to power in this country is a joke that Theresa May and her campaign team should be eternally ashamed of.

 

History will look back and find it particularly strange how a party founded for the working man ended up being a club for posh students and public sector professionals.

[Jonnyboy]

Anyone following the Labour Party conference?

 

How that shambles ever got even remotely close to power in this country is a joke that Theresa May and her campaign team should be eternally ashamed of.

 

History will look back and find it particularly strange how a party founded for the working man ended up being a club for posh students and public sector professionals.

 

If there was an election today Corbyn would win and right whingers like you have only got yourselves to blame with your over the top attacks on moderate Muslims and hard working immigrants. Take a bow.

[Sour Mash]

If there was an election today Corbyn would win and right whingers like you have only got yourselves to blame with your over the top attacks on moderate Muslims and hard working immigrants. Take a bow.

What are you on about now? That doesn't even make sense.

[Jonnyboy]

What are you on about now? That doesn't even make sense.

 

You've pushed the centre ground to the left. It's a natural reaction to the unpleasant extremist views of your overly-vocal minority. Well done.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Anyone following the Labour Party conference?

 

How that shambles ever got even remotely close to power in this country is a joke that Theresa May and her campaign team should be eternally ashamed of.

 

History will look back and find it particularly strange how a party founded for the working man ended up being a club for posh students and public sector professionals.

 

Corbyn has done a right number on the lemmings that chant Oh Jeremy Corbyn . New type of politics, authentic,it's just pony, & pony that'll hopefully be exposed by the next election. He's shameless about it. When Marr asked him & he kept refusing to answer if he'd join a picket line. Marr said "what happened to the Jeremy Corbin I've known and interviewed for years, who always gave a straight answer", his reply was " I became Labour leader". Just like every other politician who becomes leader, new kind of politics my arse.

 

 

Their Brexit position will fall apart once there's meaningful votes & they're making eye watering spending commitments. As Andy Burnham said yesterday there's nothing progressive about abolishing tuition fees as it's the high earners will benefit, it'll also cost a fortune . Today's announcements from McDonnell is just them pointing at things people don't like & saying they'll sort them. How is capping debt interest on credit cards going to encourage people to pay them off, if anything it'll encourage more debt. Everybody knows pfi contracts ( most a legacy of labour trying to keep spending off the books) are disgraceful , but where are they getting the billions from to "take them back" & what does it say to investors when the Government reneges on its deals. They claim Parliament , in other words The Party as they'll have a majority if they're implementing it, will decide the value of them. Billions of pounds & the loss of investors confidence will be the outcome. Once people wake up & realise they're bonkers ,they're screwed .

 

I personally think we'll look back on the 2017 election as a tipping point. The moment that The Tories were so bad, that they enabled the hard left to take over the Labour Party. Which in turn ensured a generation of Tory governments. Perversely, by being so bad May could have saved the Tories, because any half decent opponents would inflict a '97 whitewash on this lot

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited 25 September, 2017 by Lord Duckhunter

[hypochondriac]

You've pushed the centre ground to the left. It's a natural reaction to the unpleasant extremist views of your overly-vocal minority. Well done.

 

You could just as easily accuse the hard left corbynistas of encouraging a hard right extremist fringe. I would consider that more likely personally, particularly when you consider how leftie types largely dominate the media landscape.

[Sour Mash]

You've pushed the centre ground to the left. It's a natural reaction to the unpleasant extremist views of your overly-vocal minority. Well done.

Are you being serious? Jeremy Corbyn failed to defeat the worst tory election campaign in living memory. The Lib Dems are dead in the water. More people voted for Brexit than voted for Labour, Lib Dems and the SNP combined in the 2017 General Election - if this is what its like with the left dominating politics, bring it on

[Sour Mash]

Corbyn has done a right number on the lemmings that chant Oh Jeremy Corbyn . New type of politics, authentic,it's just pony, & pony that'll hopefully be exposed by the next election. He's shameless about it. When Marr asked him & he kept refusing to answer if he'd join a picket line. Marr said "what happened to the Jeremy Corbin I've known and interviewed for years, who always gave a straight answer", his reply was " I became Labour leader". Just like every other politician who becomes leader, new kind of politics my arse.

 

 

Their Brexit position will fall apart once there's meaningful votes & they're making eye watering spending commitments. As Andy Burnham said yesterday there's nothing progressive about abolishing tuition fees as it's the high earners will benefit, it'll also cost a fortune . Today's announcements from McDonnell is just them pointing at things people don't like & saying they'll sort them. How is capping debt interest on credit cards going to encourage people to pay them off, if anything it'll encourage more debt. Everybody knows pfi contracts ( most a legacy of labour trying to keep spending off the books) are disgraceful , but where are they getting the billions from to "take them back" & what does it say to investors when the Government reneges on its deals. They claim Parliament , in other words The Party as they'll have a majority if they're implementing it, will decide the value of them. Billions of pounds & the loss of investors confidence will be the outcome. Once people wake up & realise they're bonkers ,they're screwed .

 

I personally think we'll look back on the 2017 election as a tipping point. The moment that The Tories were so bad, that they enabled the hard left to take over the Labour Party. Which in turn ensured a generation of Tory governments. Perversely, by being so bad May could have saved the Tories, because any half decent opponents would inflict a '97 whitewash on this lot

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its a bizarre period of the Labour Party. Labour the party of party of middle class students and academics, long left behind the normal working man they were set up to represent. Policies like tuition fees a clear example of that. Their muddled thinking on Brexit. The likes of Sarah Champion sacked.

[Jonnyboy]

You could just as easily accuse the hard left corbynistas of encouraging a hard right extremist fringe. I would consider that more likely personally, particularly when you consider how leftie types largely dominate the media landscape.

 

You keep telling yourself that:lol:

[hypochondriac]

You keep telling yourself that[emoji38]

And you likewise [emoji23]

[Jonnyboy]

Are you being serious? Jeremy Corbyn failed to defeat the worst tory election campaign in living memory. The Lib Dems are dead in the water. More people voted for Brexit than voted for Labour, Lib Dems and the SNP combined in the 2017 General Election - if this is what its like with the left dominating politics, bring it on

 

Why are you loling? According to you Britain and Europe are basically under Sharia Law, surely you should be making sadfaces?

[Jonnyboy]

You could just as easily accuse the hard left corbynistas of encouraging a hard right extremist fringe. I would consider that more likely personally, particularly when you consider how leftie types largely dominate the media landscape.

 

PS you completely missed the satire of my post, as you lot keep repeating the above mantra. "ooh you lefties caused Trump by being too pc. Ooh you lefties caused the Nazi white supremacist revival by being Anti-fascist (like our troops in WW2 by the way). Muppet

[hypochondriac]

PS you completely missed the satire of my post, as you lot keep repeating the above mantra. "ooh you lefties caused Trump by being too pc. Ooh you lefties caused the Nazi white supremacist revival by being Anti-fascist (like our troops in WW2 by the way). Muppet

Laughable. No one has ever claimed that "nazis" were created by anti fascists. They were however undoubtedly encouraged by those who use identity politics in some sort of war and by the domestic terrorist group antifa. You're the muppet sunshine if you try to claim otherwise.

[Sour Mash]

Why are you loling? According to you Britain and Europe are basically under Sharia Law, surely you should be making sadfaces?

 

I'm laughing at you, didn't expect your point to fall flat on its face so quickly

[Jonnyboy]

Laughable. No one has ever claimed that "nazis" were created by anti fascists. They were however undoubtedly encouraged by those who use identity politics in some sort of war and by the domestic terrorist group antifa. You're the muppet sunshine if you try to claim otherwise.

 

"domestic terrorist group antifa" :lol:

 

[hypochondriac]

"domestic terrorist group antifa" [emoji38][emoji38][emoji38]

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/antifa-domestic-terrorists-us-security-agencies-homeland-security-fbi-a7927881.html

 

I accept your apology.

[Jonnyboy]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/antifa-domestic-terrorists-us-security-agencies-homeland-security-fbi-a7927881.html

 

I accept your apology.

 

The FBI has classified fans of the rap group Insane Clown Posse as as a gang http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/style/2017/08/31/the-fbi-labeled-insane-clown-posse-fans-a-gang-now-theyre-marching-on-washington/?utm_term=.effb2b077520

 

They too are idiots like yourself. An authoritarian government agency cracking down on hippies, like that never happened before.

Edited 25 September, 2017 by Jonnyboy

[Jonnyboy]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/antifa-domestic-terrorists-us-security-agencies-homeland-security-fbi-a7927881.html

 

I accept your apology.

 

http://progressive.org/multimedia/the-long-history-of-antifa/

 

"It’s is a movement that goes back a hundred years, but when we talk about antifa today, we are talking about modern militant anti-fascism which predominantly grew out of movements in, especially, Great Britain and Germany in the 1970s and 1980s of leftist immigrants and punks and all sorts of people who were targeted by a neo-Nazi backlash, a xenophobic wave that spread over these countries and others. It is essentially a pan-socialist radical politics of collective self-defense against the far right."

[hypochondriac]

http://progressive.org/multimedia/the-long-history-of-antifa/

 

"It’s is a movement that goes back a hundred years, but when we talk about antifa today, we are talking about modern militant anti-fascism which predominantly grew out of movements in, especially, Great Britain and Germany in the 1970s and 1980s of leftist immigrants and punks and all sorts of people who were targeted by a neo-Nazi backlash, a xenophobic wave that spread over these countries and others. It is essentially a pan-socialist radical politics of collective self-defense against the far right."

Claims that it is a self defence organisation is frankly idiotic considering the amount of violent incidents that have been perpetrated by them under little or no provocation. Smashing up and setting fire to shops in Berkley and smashing people over the head with bike locks is not self defence when the only reason they were violently protesting is because someone said something they disapproved of. Words are not violence yet antifa will claim that they are so that they can use violent actions in response. It's disgusting and most right thinking people will abhor their actions just as they abhor any violence that stems from the far right.

 

It's little wonder that they were officially recognised by US homeland security whilst Obama was still in power as domestic terrorists because that is exactly what they are. Also massive lol that the link you sent me to has progressive in the title. Nothing biased about that source! [emoji23]

Edited 25 September, 2017 by hypochondriac

[shurlock]

Claims that it is a self defence organisation is frankly idiotic considering the amount of violent incidents that have been perpetrated by them under little or no provocation. Smashing up and setting fire to shops in Berkley and smashing people over the head with bike locks is not self defence when the only reason they were violently protesting is because someone said something they disapproved of. Words are not violence yet antifa will claim that they are so that they can use violent actions in response. It's disgusting and most right thinking people will abhor their actions just as they abhor any violence that stems from the far right.

 

It's little wonder that they were officially recognised by US homeland security whilst Obama was still in power as domestic terrorists because that is exactly what they are. Also massive lol that the link you sent me to has progressive in the title. Nothing biased about that source! [emoji23]

 

Where has antifa been officially recognised as domestic terrorists - the indie link only says that some of their activities have been described as "domestic terrorist violence"? The two are not the same.

[Jonnyboy]

Claims that it is a self defence organisation is frankly idiotic considering the amount of violent incidents that have been perpetrated by them under little or no provocation. Smashing up and setting fire to shops in Berkley and smashing people over the head with bike locks is not self defence when the only reason they were violently protesting is because someone said something they disapproved of. Words are not violence yet antifa will claim that they are so that they can use violent actions in response. It's disgusting and most right thinking people will abhor their actions just as they abhor any violence that stems from the far right.

 

It's little wonder that they were officially recognised by US homeland security whilst Obama was still in power as domestic terrorists because that is exactly what they are. Also massive lol that the link you sent me to has progressive in the title. Nothing biased about that source! [emoji23]

 

Hmmm whacked on the head with a bike lock (source?) Well done for finding one example, and literally worse things do happen on a Friday night in Maidstone.

Versus driving a car into a group of people and killing one of them. I'll take the bike lock and the lack of genocide and ethnic cleansing thanks all the same.

[hypochondriac]

Where has antifa been officially recognised as domestic terrorists - the indie link only says that some of their activities have been described as "domestic terrorist violence"? The two are not the same.

 

That's like saying the KKK are not fascists, some of their activities have been described as fascist. When a significant percentage of members within an organisation commit domestic terrorism then at what point is it accurately described as a domestic terrorist group? Antifa allows domestic terrorism to be committed in their name and a number of members have been involved in violence and unprovoked attacks.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad-antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/?utm_term=.decde9a1ee16

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/18/us/unmasking-antifa-anti-fascists-hard-left/index.html

 

http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/25/former-college-prof-arrested-for-antifa-bike-lock-attacks-in-berkeley/

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4828672/Masked-antifa-swarm-Berkeley-rally-assaulting-several.html

[Jonnyboy]

That's like saying the KKK are not fascists, some of their activities have been described as fascist. When a significant percentage of members within an organisation commit domestic terrorism then at what point is it accurately described as a domestic terrorist group? Antifa allows domestic terrorism to be committed in their name and a number of members have been involved in violence and unprovoked attacks.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/28/black-clad-antifa-attack-right-wing-demonstrators-in-berkeley/?utm_term=.decde9a1ee16

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/18/us/unmasking-antifa-anti-fascists-hard-left/index.html

 

http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/25/former-college-prof-arrested-for-antifa-bike-lock-attacks-in-berkeley/

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4828672/Masked-antifa-swarm-Berkeley-rally-assaulting-several.html

 

No, that's liking saying that all Southampton fans are violent hooligans because a few have been arrested and put in prison whilst wearing the same replica kit as other fans.

[hypochondriac]

Hmmm whacked on the head with a bike lock (source?) Well done for finding one example, and literally worse things do happen on a Friday night in Maidstone.

Versus driving a car into a group of people and killing one of them. I'll take the bike lock and the lack of genocide and ethnic cleansing thanks all the same.

 

One example? There are literally dozens of examples (a few are listed above.) With regards the bike lock here is the video and news article about the unprovoked and violent attack carried out by a member of antifa:

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2017/05/29/a-man-clobbered-trump-supporters-with-a-bike-lock-the-internet-went-looking-for-him/?utm_term=.8b13f205b3ec

 

It was subsequently discovered that this nasty assault was committed by a professor and he is currently awaiting trial I believe. Thankfully the victim was left with no permanent damage but no doubt it could have led to a much more serious injury.

 

Of course there are many other attacks which have left people with various injuries including eyesight loss. It's odd that you would try to compare disgusting violence from the far right with this sort of behaviour since it's not something which should be compared. The far left have more than their fair share or violent extremists who are happy to use physical attacks to get their own way and that should be roundly condemmed by all. Lets not forget this also:

 

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-pol-virginia-shooter-profile-20170614-story.html

[hypochondriac]

No, that's liking saying that all Southampton fans are violent hooligans because a few have been arrested and put in prison whilst wearing the same replica kit as other fans.

 

Oh I see. Kindly point out for me which of these are real members of Antifa and which ones are just pretending? Let me guess, all the peaceful ones are the real antifa? So who are the others then? Because they claim to be antifa, some have even been viewed in the media as spokespeople for the group. Are they fake antifa too?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G8QLT6tFWU

 

No doubt you will join me in condemning these violent thugs who have seemingly taken over antifa and committed domestic terrorist activities in its name and in the process blackening the name of the scores of peaceful antifa who would never dream of committing unprovoked violence. If not, why not?

Edited 25 September, 2017 by hypochondriac

[Jonnyboy]

Oh I see. Kindly point out for me which of these are real members of Antifa and which ones are just pretending? Let me guess, all the peaceful ones are the real antifa? So who are the others then? Because they claim to be antifa, some have even been viewed in the media as spokespeople for the group. Are they fake antifa too?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G8QLT6tFWU

 

No doubt you will join me in condemning these violent thugs who have seemingly taken over antifa and committed domestic terrorist activities in its name and in the process blackening the name of the scores of peaceful antifa who would never dream of committing unprovoked violence. If not, why not?

 

If a genuine Nazi sympathiser has his head kicked in it should be applauded. It's not pretty but probably the only language the truly understand. If someone claiming to be antifa is just attacking random strangers then yes they are fake antifa and likely mentally disturbed.

[hypochondriac]

If a genuine Nazi sympathiser has his head kicked in it should be applauded. It's not pretty but probably the only language the truly understand. If someone claiming to be antifa is just attacking random strangers then yes they are fake antifa and likely mentally disturbed.

Who decides who is a genuine nazi sympathiser? Do you applaud white supremacist Richard Spencer being punched in the face?

 

You also never answered my question, do you condemn the violence from my video clip committed by those who claim to be from antifa?

 

Pretty disgusting that you would see any sort of violence as a solution. I want to see the ideas of nazi sympathisers publicly challenged and nazi sympathisers made to look foolish when their ideas are seen as vacuous and worthy of derision. I certainly won't be applauding people who think a violent response to ideas is something that should be encouraged.

Edited 25 September, 2017 by hypochondriac

[hutch]

If there was an election today Corbyn would win and right whingers like you have only got yourselves to blame with your over the top attacks on moderate Muslims and hard working immigrants. Take a bow.

It's such a bugger that Theresa May chose to hold the election on the one day in the year when millions of labour voters had to stay at home to wash their hair.

[Sour Mash]

Meanwhile, back at the Labour Party conference, female BBC journalists are needing to hire bodyguards to attend. Just another tick in the box for the new, kinder politics, along with their anti Semitism.

[Jonnyboy]

Where's all the pacifist right wingers on here condeming the violence on the Muslim surgeon who was stabbed in the neck the other day? #silence

[hypochondriac]

Where's all the pacifist right wingers on here condeming the violence on the Muslim surgeon who was stabbed in the neck the other day? #silence

 

What does that have to do with anything? Why should right wingers have to condemn violence before you are able to? If so called right wingers are unable to condemn unprovoked and violent actions when asked then really that says more about them and their clear bias than anything else. So again, do you condemn the many violent actions of those individuals in that video that claim to be a part of antifa?

[shurlock]

What does that have to do with anything? Why should right wingers have to condemn violence before you are able to? If so called right wingers are unable to condemn unprovoked and violent actions when asked then really that says more about them and their clear bias than anything else. So again, do you condemn the many violent actions of those individuals in that video that claim to be a part of antifa?

 

They can be condemned while acknowledging that right-wing extremism is a far bigger problem than left-wing extremism.

[hypochondriac]

They can be condemned while acknowledging that right-wing extremism is a far bigger problem than left-wing extremism.

 

Of course if that's your opinion. That's not what I asked though and the reticence from Jonnyboy to answer a simple question makes me suspicious that he does think that violence is an appropriate response in these cases (he has pretty much confirmed that already with his view that a nazi sympathiser getting his head kicked in should be applauded.)

 

Jonnyboy do you condemn the many acts of violence committed by those supposed antifa members in that video? Do you believe it was right that Richard Spencer was punched in the face?

[Jonnyboy]

What does that have to do with anything? Why should right wingers have to condemn violence before you are able to? If so called right wingers are unable to condemn unprovoked and violent actions when asked then really that says more about them and their clear bias than anything else. So again, do you condemn the many violent actions of those individuals in that video that claim to be a part of antifa?

 

Wearing a swastika, writing racist books delivering prejudice-filled speeches are extremely provocative. So you can't call any natural reaction of violence unprovoked.

[hypochondriac]

It seems clear to me what the tactics of many members of antifa are:

 

1) Pretend to be supportive of freedom of speech but against so called "hate speech"

2) Broaden the definition of hate speech to include those who disagree with you so that you feel morally justified in preventing them from speaking.

3) Consider anything you deem to be hate speech to be violence.

4) Use physical violence in response to what you define as violent hate speech.

5) Feel morally justified because you are "defending" yourself.

 

As the definition of who is a so called Nazi becomes anyone who disagrees with the hard left anti capitalist agenda pushed by antifa, it suddenly becomes acceptable to use violence against an ever expanding number of people.

[hypochondriac]

Wearing a swastika, writing racist books delivering prejudice-filled speeches are extremely provocative. So you can't call any natural reaction of violence unprovoked.

 

So the answer is that you agree that violence is the correct method for dealing with Richard Spencer? When he is just standing in the street? Is there any time when it would be unacceptable to react violently towards him in your opinion?

 

The man who was assaulted with a bike lock, do you believe his actions in the video were deserving of that?

[shurlock]

Of course if that's your opinion. That's not what I asked though and the reticence from Jonnyboy to answer a simple question makes me suspicious that he does think that violence is an appropriate response in these cases (he has pretty much confirmed that already with his view that a nazi sympathiser getting his head kicked in should be applauded.)

 

Jonnyboy do you condemn the many acts of violence committed by those supposed antifa members in that video? Do you believe it was right that Richard Spencer was punched in the face?

 

You don’t agree with my statement above?

[hypochondriac]

Just to be clear Jonnyboy, someone delivering a speech that you believe to be full of prejudice merits violent action in response?

[hypochondriac]

You don’t agree with my statement above?

That very much depends. Far left extremism is a much greater problem within educational institutions for example and much of the media and its pretty much taken over the labour party in the UK and betrayed the traditional labour voter in the process. I suppose it depends on what the definition of far right is, but then as I have already discussed, members of antifa considers the majority of people who disagree with them to be fascists to the point that the likes of Gad Saad is called a nazi (if you know him you realise how mental that is.) No wonder they see a nazi around every corner.

 

As I said though it's really a different conversation and no matter what you think with regards to the scale of the respective problems, I think there is a problem from both abd that both needs to be tackled.

Edited 26 September, 2017 by hypochondriac

[Jonnyboy]

Just to be clear Jonnyboy, someone delivering a speech that you believe to be full of prejudice merits violent action in response?

 

You said these actions were unprovoked. I'm saying hate speech is provocative.

[hypochondriac]

You said these actions were unprovoked. I'm saying hate speech is provocative.

And who defines what hate speech is? In my view having a rule that some ill defined and broadly encompassing hate speech justifies a violent response is utterly contemptible and on a par with the sort of right wing extremist stuff that Sour Mash comes out with. I don't believe that words are violence and I don't believe that violence is ever a acceptable response to so called hate speech.

[Jonnyboy]

And who defines what hate speech is? In my view having a rule that some ill defined and broadly encompassing hate speech justifies a violent response is utterly contemptible and on a par with the sort of right wing extremist stuff that Sour Mash comes out with. I don't believe that words are violence and I don't believe that violence is ever a acceptable response to so called hate speech.

 

We better call you Mahatma from now on then.

 

It's funny how you are trying to present yourself as fair and balanced yet all these passionate diatribes only come out in defence of alt-right racists and other assorted right wingers. Makes you look like Trump but with better grammar.

[Johnny Bognor]

And who defines what hate speech is? In my view having a rule that some ill defined and broadly encompassing hate speech justifies a violent response is utterly contemptible and on a par with the sort of right wing extremist stuff that Sour Mash comes out with. I don't believe that words are violence and I don't believe that violence is ever a acceptable response to so called hate speech.

I think what little johnny is saying is that he defends Britain First's opposition to extremist islamist gatherings, especially where hate preachers spout anti west and anti Christian propaganda.

 

But he feels that BF don't go far enough. In his view, he thinks they should steam in and kick the crap out of the islamists...

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[hypochondriac]

We better call you Mahatma from now on then.

 

It's funny how you are trying to present yourself as fair and balanced yet all these passionate diatribes only come out in defence of alt-right racists and other assorted right wingers. Makes you look like Trump but with better grammar.

There's enough refutations of the far right. It's been all over the media for months and has been roundly denounced and derided by the vast majority of people. I have denounced them on a number of occasions including on here and I would be saying similar things that I am saying to you of anyone came on here attempting to excuse far right violence. No one has thus far so there is no need to do that but it's very troubling that you seemingly have a lot of difficulty denouncing this far left extremist violence.

 

It's hardly some saintly virtue to denounce violence in response to speech, it's basic common sense and the moderate position and reaction that virtually all sensible people would have. Resorting to comparing me to Trump when you are the one refusing to condemn violence is laughable.

Edited 26 September, 2017 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

I think what little johnny is saying is that he defends Britain First's opposition to extremist islamist gatherings, especially where hate preachers spout anti west and anti Christian propaganda.

 

But he feels that BF don't go far enough. In his view, he thinks they should steam in and kick the crap out of the islamists...

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Indeed. But violence in response to ideas we don't like is fine as long as the violence doesn't come from the group we disagree with...

[Jonnyboy]

I think what little johnny is saying is that he defends Britain First's opposition to extremist islamist gatherings, especially where hate preachers spout anti west and anti Christian propaganda.

 

But he feels that BF don't go far enough. In his view, he thinks they should steam in and kick the crap out of the islamists...

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

I've got no problem with someone like Abu Hamza receiving a swift kick in the ********.

 

The problem is you Britain First apologists who want every Muslim banned from the country. Many, like Sour Mash, would like an entire group of people forcibly removed.