audio-talk

Or gove......

I've been thinking a little about this, ... Boris is a buffoon and incapable of much thought that isn't venal, vicious and selfish. He is not s Stalin, Hitler, Mao or Mussolini. If Britain becomes fascist it won't be in Boris' interest.

Nevertheless, why don't people care about his lies, why do people believe 'good old Boris' and bollocks like that?

Arlene Foster has gone and good riddance. Ten minutes of her vitriol and nastiness makes me sick.

But Boris remains. so far.... we deserve the leader we vote for ( while we still have the vote )

What comes next? We spend many millions on an aircraft carrier which could be disabled by a few terrorists with anti tank missiles oh and how the support vessels could trumpet their success if they managed to vaporise such a threat or totally sunk by a , say Chinese, stealth submarine. Perhaps this symbol is an extension of MAD warfare particularly as most of the attack crew and planes are american.

But what are we doing?

Here's the next big step :
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/e ... d=msedgntp

...Although maybe I'm over-estimating the ability to follow these things through :
Cummings criticised Johnson as completely unfit to be prime minister, describing him as media obsessed and “like a shopping trolley smashing from one side of the aisle to the other”

"The government should drop its "disproportionate" plan to ban noisy protests in England and Wales, a parliamentary committee has warned.

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill would also introduce powers to deal with demonstrations involving only one person.

The Joint Committee on Human Rights said the legislation could undermine freedom of expression.

But the Home Office said it would not "impinge" on the right to protest."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57556947


*

My god, how satisfying is it, to see the back of this guy ?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57625508
I'll take this as a late birthday present.

It helps, it helps.

As one of the Americans on this site, I am certainly aware of how quickly the wind can "blow in other directions". Fact is, there is no such thing as a "little" democracy. You either have the whole thing or essentially nothing at all.

The issue here seems to be how can democracy - that is inherently ill suited to protect itself, deal with modern, well organised anarchistic subversive activity?

I would maintain that our elected officials are too slow, complacent and agenda driven to properly deal with any of the issues facing society. Our courts are too bogged down to provide quick access to "justice". Therefore, the "workaround" is to test the waters with bills that partly restrict personal freedoms and react based on the noise caused when "interested" citizens read it.

I would not label this as fascist, I would call it a feeble attempt by feeble minds to bend democracy to fit the current social realities. I do believe that we need to do something. At gut level, strengthening education, the police and the courts sounds most promising.

rowuk wrote: ↑Sat Jun 26, 2021 11:22 pm
At gut level, strengthening education, the police and the courts sounds most promising.

It does.

I don't know who is mainly responsible for fighting cyber crime (including internet and phone scams) but they need reinforcement.

At gut level, strengthening education, the police and the courts sounds most promising.

The problem is (I would say) that just about any decision that is taken "at gut level" will be wrong when you actually look at evidence. And what does promising mean in that context, which group of society do you want to favour more?

Education: The problem is that everyone has been to school, so they assume that makes them qualified to have an opinion on education. Just what does "strengthening" mean in this context? Reducing the number of subjects, increasing the nunber? Making it selective so the best get the most, or making it comprehensive so the best get ignored?

Police: Again, what does strengthening look like here, giving them more powers or giving them more money?

Courts: And again, what does it look like, longer sentences, or more sentencing options?

And Phil, its easy to reduce cyber crime, create a Chinese firewall around the country and limit access to information and choice. Maybe we don’t want that?

Nick wrote: ↑Sun Jun 27, 2021 10:07 am
Police: Again, what does strengthening look like here, giving them more powers or giving them more money?

It would (in my opinion) be better for us all if there were more Police on the ground. They don't need more powers, just a better chance of bringing miscreants to justice.

It's not so bad for people in populated areas, but many rural folk have their nearest Police presence at least 30 minutes afar when an emergency occurs. Get them back on the beat, or on bicycles (electric ?) so they can get to know an area and what goes on in it.

Democracy? Much has been written over the centuries and it seems to me that we can look longingly towards Scandinavia as 'more democratic' and the USA with their fine Constitution and yet the system allowed for a monster of anti-democracy to become PotUS, the founding fathers ( where's the founding mothers ?) didnt see that coming.

Slavery was the basis of ancient Greece, the Romans were more clever to their colonies but never pretended what a Republic was. England bases itself in western democracy and it too got extremely wealthy in its colonial powers before a conscience developed and the USA is only a generation away from the last slave to die.

Back, not so long ago when being a fascist was to many not only acceptable but desirable there were many many many more police in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany ,Italy and Spain than before or after 1940s. Fascism is often called a police state.

So why have the Tories cut, cut and cut police in Britain? Does the ruling class feel so secure?

What are the police for?
Who are the police working for?
Bobbies on bicycles two by two, just when the Met was about as corrupt as it could get.
Who decides what the police do?
Who decides what and where the national curriculum is taught to whom.
What kind of society has a polit bureau where most members are PhD in engineering and what society has a moderate classics student with the morality if a stud farm stoat to rule?
Marx's dialectical materialism might still have something to entertain political thinkers....

Until the private sector for education is slashed and proper funding for school where there is genuine equality of opportunity and basic needs are provided we will never have a 'more democratic' society. Sajid Javid was a comprehensive school boy. Does Boris now imagine he's done his bit to 'level up society?

In his Prison Notebooks, Gramsci wrote, '... a society deserves the leaders it allows to rule...' Some people have more blame than others but Democracy is where we all have responsibility to change whatever needs changing. We vote out Trump and we laugh Boris away. If only....

We pay the price otherwise, we pay the price.

Very much agree Andrew. Also interesting how religion seized control in the US which was very much not the founders intention.

Religion yeah, didnt see that coming even though on every dollar bill it says, 'In God we trust'.....