A thread for Brits to discuss green energy, the psychology of homosexuality, JK Rowling, and prisoners having sex with wardens
Also there's an election going on but everyone got bored of it a week ago because they go on for too long, maybe someone will do a cytube for it if anyone even remembers it's happening
>>598254We will continue to go for nuclear because their is a lot of money to be made in it by already established nuclear energy companies.
No to nuclear. It's literally just a scam on you personally, your energy bills.
>>598253Nah. My working view is that there was a factional split in the bourgeoisie on EU membership which was ultimately resolved in favor of a fairly strong EU withdrawal (first by blundering the referendum, second because the alternative was mild social democracy) which Britain lacks the state capacity to actually do anything with. General institutional decline explains both why we left, and why things have continued getting worse after leaving. (Though since austerity is a major cause of both, and since the losing side tends to get a boost in elections, the "Cameron remains PM and we stay in the EU" timeline might just be the one where either Labour or the Tories die to a resurgent UKIP in 2019.)
>>598254The numbers with nuclear are messy because you can reprocess spent fuel. (Though sometimes this is just cope for "what do we do with the waste?") That said, Nuclear's one of those things i've developed an aversion to. Not so much for fear of the technology itself (although once again: if it's riskier than a wind turbine, do you really want Britain's decrepit institutions responsible for making sure it's not spewing out a
Windscale a week?), which i used to advocate, more from seeing who else advocates it and who they tend to align themselves with. It's that old binary friend/enemy distinction again: Environmentalists are the enemy of Nuclear, while fossil fuels are merely irrelevant. Thus, pro-nuclear people tend to be more anti-Environmentalist than anti-Oil, and being anti-Environmentalist is a suspect look. (yeah, yeah, some anti-nuclear types are de-facto pro oil, but they give off the vibe of innocent naivete rather than malice.)
>>598256Oh, an example footnote: The civil service literally did no planning for the event of a "Leave" vote in the EU referendum because the government felt it would be "defeatist", even though such planning would have given them
more ammunition by drawing attention to logistical snags and annoyances with actually leaving.
Traditionally, they'd plan for every event - in 1983 they still drew up plans for what to do if Michael Foot or the SDP defied expectations and took power - but in a referendum that was going to go 52/48 one way or another, they weren't allowed. Then suddenly it was happening, and in some cases it wasn't until article 50 was triggered that some departments noticed just how annoying it was going to be to disentangle everything.
>>598257Looking at my local water company, electricity company, and so on was the killer for me. Nah if there was an error we will all die.
Also hinkley point is french and the deal says we will
always be paying over market odds on the energy from it.
that can fuck off.
>>598266We lopped King Charles I's head off and became a commonwealth for a little while, then we brought monarchy back by enthroning his son, Charles II.
Then the bourg decided they hated Catholics, so we deposed that guy's heir and brought in a Dutchman, praising ourselves for being glorious patriots all the while.
This country is so much worse than "never had a revolution": we have been living in the era of blackest reaction for a hundred years longer than America has been living. Our agrarian proto-socialists once dreamed of digging on St George's Hill, today said hill is a private gated community where houses sell from £5-30 million.
>>598267>some government bullshit, I got a letter but threw it outKek. Oh, it's teh election day, i guess.
I think i'm going to weekday drink instead.
>>598251>prisoners having sex with wardensThis is the most important thing to discuss currently. What is causing the epidemic of female prison officers fucking the inmates they are supposed to be guarding?
I don't want to go all incel on this, but can woman officers spend all day around sexually frustrated hyper-masculine chads without the result being prison sex? The next government urgently needs to look into the situation.
>>598275>This is the most important thing to discuss currently. What is causing the epidemic of female prison officers fucking the inmates they are supposed to be guarding? Literally always exists and exists with the other gender too. As to what's causing it; exodus of experienced guards, cuts to everything but including oversight, new guards without training and very bad pay, easier for prisoners also to build intimate relationships in order to have a line for smuggling, with the low pay, low oversight and the fact that they are far more likely to now not see the job as a long-term-career but a short term work.
With the horrific, degraded nature of our prisons is this really the prison issue that is important to you?
>I don't want to go all incel on this, but can woman officers spend all day around sexually frustrated hyper-masculine chads without the result being prison sex? The next government urgently needs to look into the situation.The main understanding afaiu is that prison-sex allows complete control and compartmentalization over the sexual-encounters.
>>598265A great and tragic love story
>>598272The great and authentic revolutionaries of the United Kingdom are two: Farage and Davis
>>598282it's rare for the WPB to poll anything like that well
(if you want to defend them, possibly because they're only running in ~1/5th of seats, which is a lot for a party of their size, butt not a lot compared to all the other parties on that list which are running in 4/5th or more.)
part funny, part confusing: electoral calculus predicts galloway will win his seat with 28% of the vote, but Labour has a higher chance of winning it. (?) if they're right, it'll be a real FPTP result: 28% workers party, 26% labour.
>>598281This has always baffled me. Do they genuinely believe Labour care about minorities or something?
>>598284Well that could be a good thing in itself. People are far too complacent about the voting system.
https://archive.ph/bU7MiThe Sunday Times is endorsing Labour because… the Conservative governments they endorsed in 2010, 2015, 2017, and 2019 were bad, actually.
If only they'd noticed that earlier, eh?
The NPR profile on Keir Starmer this morning was pretty funny. Just laying Keir out. Fake radical turned sell out prosecutor who back stabbed his mentor so he could sell out the party just so he can be PM all because he has a chip on his shoulder about the posh kids teasing him in school.
https://www.npr.org/2024/07/01/nx-s1-5009423/u-k-labour-party-candidate-born-in-china-writes-about-womens-private-evolutions
>This Thursday, on America's Independence Day, Britain will elect a prime minister. The leading candidate is a human rights lawyer, a knight and possibly the inspiration for a brooding heartthrob in the Bridget Jones movies. NPR's Lauren Frayer has this profile, the man who is expected to win in a landslide.
>LAUREN FRAYER, BYLINE: As a youngster, Keir Starmer got teased for his uncommon first name.
>UNIDENTIFIED NARRATOR: The father of the Labour Party, Keir Hardie.
>UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: (As Keir) The equal rights of all men and women…
>FRAYER: Which was also the name of the 19th-century founder of the political party Starmer would grow up to run. Another early hurdle for Starmer was class. He grew up in an affluent, conservative suburb of London. But his family was blue-collar, says his biographer, Tom Baldwin.
>TOM BALDWIN: His dad was a toolmaker who, probably, people didn't understand as being skilled and clever because they just saw him as working in a factory. And he always resented that. He felt them being snobbish towards him.
>FRAYER: Baldwin says Starmer's dad withdrew and was sometimes surly. His mom, a nurse in the National Health Service - or NHS - was also chronically ill herself, in and out of the hospital, something Starmer often now says in speeches instilled in him the importance of free public health care.
>KEIR STARMER: The NHS that had been her livelihood became her lifeline.
>FRAYER: Like his namesake, Starmer joined the young socialists. He became a human rights lawyer, fighting cases against big oil and against McDonald's. He was even rumored to have inspired the character of a fictional lawyer in the popular Bridget Jones books and movies…
>(SOUNDBITE OF FILM, "BRIDGET JONES'S DIARY")
>RENEE ZELLWEGER: (As Bridget) Maybe this was the mysterious Mr. Right I'd been waiting my whole life to meet.
>FRAYER: …Played by a taciturn Colin Firth. Starmer later switched sides, though, and became a prosecutor, something his biographer says annoyed some of Starmer's left-wing human rights colleagues. And when riots broke out in London in 2011…
>(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
>UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: The first flames in a night of many fires.
>UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Some people went to jail for first offenses, for stealing, like, you know, some doughnuts. He didn't sentence them, but he was very keen that they got processed through the courts quickly.
>FRAYER: In 2014, Starmer got a knighthood for his criminal justice work, becoming Sir Keir. And a year later, he won a seat in Parliament.
>CAROLYN HARRIS: I was expecting someone slightly standoffish or very formal.
>FRAYER: Carolyn Harris, a Labour MP from Wales, recalls meeting him that first day.
>HARRIS: I actually poked him in the back and said, you are that Keir Starmer. And he said, yes, I am. And I said, I'm going to make you the leader of the Labour Party.
>FRAYER: And what was his response? Was he like, yes, please? Or - (laughter).
>HARRIS: He smiled and laughed. And he said, well, we need to have a cup of tea and talk about that then.
>FRAYER: (Laughter).
>Harris says she spotted in Starmer a pragmatist willing to do what it takes to get elected. He kicked his left-wing mentor out of the party and moved Labour to the center. When climate activists heckled Starmer this spring, here's how he responded.(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
>STARMER: We gave up on being a party of protests five years ago. We want to be a party of power.
>FRAYER: Starmer's lead in the polls, though, may be less about him, says Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee, and more about voters' rejection of incumbent Conservatives - who've been in power for 14 years, through Brexit and Boris Johnson and a whole lot of tumult.
>POLLY TOYNBEE: People are very, very angry about almost everything. I don't think I've been through an election that has quite that revenge feeling to it.FRAYER: And so despite the fact that only four Labour leaders have ever won an election in more than a century, this election is Labour's to lose.
>GABRIEL POGRUND: Labour, it needs to act as though it's holding this priceless piece of ceramic, an immaculate Ming vase, across a thin sheet of ice.
>FRAYER: Gabriel Pogrund, a political journalist with the Sunday Times, says Starmer basically has to avoid giving anyone a reason not to vote for him.
>POGRUND: He has adopted a cautious, risk-averse approach. He's decided to sandpaper down all of his fiscal commitments. He's said he will preserve the government's position on Ukraine and other foreign policy positions. The biggest change won't be in terms of the political economy of the country, the ideology of government, it will be in reestablishing competence.
>FRAYER: Now, the first Keir, the one who founded the Labour Party back in 1900, he never actually won an election himself. But this Keir looks likely to do that with a pragmatic, centrist approach, and even his supporters say, maybe by just keeping his mouth shut.>>598251I'm an anglophile, I think britons are the best of the best of humanity and did more for the world than any other race or culture
I am brown and latino tho
>>598327that doesn't mean shit.
he used to have a mossad agent working for him, though. one of those unit 8200 guys, so a real super spook.
>>598326Yeah and a bunch of Israel lobbyists
>>598327Purely coincidental
>>598331lol. lmao.
8200 is really scary too, they are basically the NSA with even less morals.
>>598332Israel is up to their neck in this shit and have a strong position in the privatised intelligence service sector; Black Cube, NSO Group, White Knight, and Psy-Group
Also Kroll is an American one dominated by New York Jews who worked with Weinstein, who also employed Black Cube. They were involved in the privatisation of the USSR to some extent and Yeltsin employed them for a while (it appears GKChP stole a bunch of money before the coup lmao, will have to look into it deeper at some point).
>>598339Not surprising, South Sudan (SS) was carved out of original Sudan to stick it to an Arab state with fundamental assistance from the usual suspects. Then, when they were allowed to secede, they were left to rot in a constant state of civil war and extreme poverty. And in the end even original Sudan cucked and gave diplomatic recognition to you know who.
>>598341Mate, really, I feel you. I feel that feel. I've experienced two deeply cucked CUNTries in my life - Bongland and Wopistan - and I still have relatives on your side of the Anglo Channel and at this point I think I can tell when there's no realistic hope for a place. As far as trans issues go, some time back I really didn't care but all the nasty and clear manipulation of the thing convinced me that we are in the middle of another witch hunt deliberately unleashed on a very marginal, small and for the most part defenceless group of people. Unfortunately there are a lot of feeble minds around and this kind of propaganda sticks very easily. It's easy to punch down and you are even rewarded as far as you never punch up.
>>598346ice bucket challenge
yes i'm bringing it back
lol two Telegraph/Compact and Spectator journos got bankrupted and revealed to be Nazis, and some TERFs are shrieking about it. Nina was also editor of Compact
Found it posted in /isg/ for some reason when it is clearly of bongoloid interest
https://nitter.poast.org/Luke_Turner/status/1808043526413807969#mhttps://luketurner.com/Nina_Power/>>598356a constituency poll had him behind, so he could still lose his seat. this is nationwide approval
what's funny here is that Corbyn is more popular than Starmer, despite Corbyn having lead the party into two elections versus Starmer not yet finishing even one, despite the press 2015-20 being totally dedicated to badmouthing Corbyn (and no small amount of continued seethe since) and the press 2022-24 being almost totally dedicated to boosting Starmer. Basically, before he's even entered office, Starmer is already historically unpopular. Even if you take at face value that the public just didn't like Corbyn: Corbyn was never Prime Minister, Starmer is about to be - and with a huge majority.
>>598362Starmer is not a personally popular man. He is less popular than Jeremy Corbyn despite the press propping him up, and the press tearing Corbyn to shreds. The people with the power to suddenly notice that he is an insufferable, corrupt, nasty, miserable cunt of a man are the press - and the British press are deranged with anti-Trans brainworms. He is not a man blessed with good communications skills, charm, wit, or anything else that could enable him to build a legitimate support base. (And Boris Johnson, who did have some of these traits, was in any case trivial to remove…) He is a grey void held up at the whim of a horrible system.
In 2017 Theresa May wanted the same gender recognition reforms that were veto'd by the UK government when the Scots tried them in 2023. This was just a cross-party consensus. In 2022, the press was totally deranged and some crybullying by MPs like Rosie Duffield and the SNP's Johanna Cherry (inshallah the only Scottish Labour gain of the next election) were lapping up the attention, but even Conservative ministers were still playing to the "liberal" script - tweeting out how proud they were that you could now apply for a GRC online, a slightly simpler process. Then the Tories desperately pivoted to making this their culture war issue to win back the press's mandate of heaven. They veto'd the Scottish GRC law to kick off a fight and put themselves on the reactionary side of it in the hopes that'd show they were true believers. It didn't work, Starmer was quick there as elsewhere to avoid getting on the wrong side of the press. But the thing with a deranged obsessive is that they'll never stop purity testing you. So they're constantly crying "Jump" - now, in addition to his other deficits, Sir Keith is not a man of courage, and he is very used to serving deranged bullies from his time as head of the crown prosecution service, and so he dutifully jumps.
>>598366The EHRC has a wide-ranging remit covering all human rights based issues. The appointment is basically a (quite corrupt - but the Tories are the same, hence why the EHRC is currently full of deranged bigots) reward to a party grandee. She's the one who introduced the Equality Act 2010 in the first place, so it's easy to justify, and it might even be an area of personal interest.
Her statement is not so much mixed messaging as it is the least that they could possibly promise. (they they won't abolish the 2004 gender recognition act, which the European Court of Human Rights forced the Blair government to create - against its will - something that, if they did, would land them right back in human rights court again!)
>>598379>labour have much better plans:D
>to privatize the NHS:(
>>598360>'we will all be happy if no one is happy'The mantra of the British.
>inb4 racistI have seen black and asian British infected with it too. It's a mind virus, not a gene. We are a nation of sado-masochists.
>>598365This right here. Perfect example.
>>598408>some cis women will be transvestigatedI'm calling it now - rapid deployment chromosome test. The loos will have a cup you have to spit in to unlock either the XY or XX door.
>inb4 no one would actually do thatThis is Britain. Yes they would.
>>598445Britain doesn't really hate trans people, the British press and some boomers (there's yer CPB) do.
It mostly has the same roots as hate for Corbyn: hate for the young, hate for no longer being the most lefty-liberal person in the room just because you're the designated guardian columnist who's long since resigned themselves to eternal Blairism.
>>598445transphobia is big everywhere rn
the apathy of the "liberal" political establishment (in this case labour) towards the backlash is also not that out of the ordinary
>>598443Simone de Beauvoir is most famous for saying "one becomes, rather than is born a woman", following from sartre's "existence precedes essence". She was also accepting of gender deviants. Even emma goldman speaks of transsexual friends. Transsexuality is a natural product of the contradiction of modern gender roles, which then entrench them deeper in the failure of disalienation.
You dont have to celebrate it to be able to see its dialectical arrival (rather than occult conspiracy of whatever).
>>1903834The bourgeois class is notoriously squemish about sex, thats why they live the middle class fantasy of respectability.
Also, bohemian grove in form is not what it consists of in content. It is all ceremony and no substance, which perfectly highlights their repression.
Theyre like edgelords who play up the aesthetic, yet in doing this, invest in the logic of the culture's morality. This is why all satanism is inherently conservative.
>135 replies>28 IPlmao
>>1903788Critical support for the NAZIs in their historically progressive task, then.
>>598377>First months nazis were in power they burned down the sexology institute of Berlin because trans stuff made them seethe so badI'm pro-trans but this is is not really true. They mainly went sacking it because the institude had many patient records implicating the whole of Germany's political class. And their regime was more focused on oppressing homosexuals and pederasts than transsexuals, by homosexual i mean gay men specifically lesbians were mostly not included in NAZI repression. Himmler in particular was scared to death that homosexuals would form a fifth column in the state to push their agenda so they repressed them pretty harshly but not as heavily as jews or communists.
MAGAcoms uses these information dishonestly to portray the nazis as some kind of trans-loving esoterics which they were not but no sources indicates us that were very pressed about the Trans Question either, at least not moreso than the average german conservative of their time.
>>1903823>"the cubans are nazi wizards or something">>1903882>"theres no gay and trans in china or something" >>598448in Britain the distinction is much more strongly establishment vs non-establishment. the CPB's justification for their TERF-ery, for example, stands much more in British law (muh equality act! muh sewell convention!) than it does in Marxism. The Guardian (and its sister paper, the Observer), our nominally liberal establishment paper which always endorses Labour or the Lib Dems, unironically has an internal TERF cabal.
https://transwrites.world/guardian-writers-and-editor-set-up-group-to-make-guardian-more-transphobic/ and this has been going on for a long time
https://newsocialist.org.uk/on-the-guardians-transphobic-centrism/ when low ranking staff dissented and some members of the public sent in an open letter disagreeing, one or two like Suzanne Moore* threw a hissy-fit and the rest of the press closed ranks around them.
(Remember, in 2017, that
Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May wanted liberal reforms to gender recognition law - the Guardian in 2018 was
more transphobic than the Tory PM who deported British citizens! And Jeremy Corbyn was, of course, more pro-Trans than her!)
*latest article: whining that Keir Starmer is insufficiently transphobic in the telegraph. opinion on Corbyn in 2015? "a party without a point, led by a rebel with a cause". Once you see this common factor, you cannot unsee it: a journalist was used to getting more-liberal-than-thou praise because they opposed the Iraq war, the bare minimum, but when a SocDem came along and outflanked them economically, when trans people meant you couldn't get radlib points just for keeping your poof jokes to private company anymore, what was to happen but a big fat closing of the ranks and a tilt to reaction?
>>598454the nazis sacked the institut because they saw it as degenerate
it's a very simple explanation to anyone that isn't consumed by this board's brainworms
also mtf's were sent to concentration camps as homosexual males iirc
>>598463well the pro-trans argument is that there should be gender neutral washrooms
nice horseshoe theory about trans people and the conservatives that want to heckle and assault them in public tho
>>598465If you have legit reason to go to the other sex's bathroom you explain yourself.
>Sorry, ours was full, really had to piss, sorry.that's fucking it, but NOOOOOOOOOOOO
<IM BEING MOLESTERED BY TRANS EYES IN MY HOLY SANCTUM OF WOMANHOOD THE TOILET<OOOOH LA LAA, THIS WAITER TOLD ME TO USE THIS OR THAT SHITTING HOLENOBODY CARES, JUST TAKE A SHIT AND FLUSH THE FUKKEN TOILET AND STOP MAKING SCENES ABOUT THE MOST MUNDANE IDIOCY EVER >>598470>this so-called “anti” trans stuff sure gets the YIMBY crowd upsetterminal brainworms. YIMBY types are particularly vulnerable to being wallet inspected by Starmer's promise of planning reform. stop imagining everyone you don't like on twitter is one guy.
"good on starmer for saying what the press want him to say" - shut up.
>>598493There are countries that don't do this.
I saw a video of China.
>>598445>Why does Britain hate transgender people so much?Anglo box positivism.
Everything must fit into a discrete, black-and-white taxonomic category. Anything that blurs the lines can't be tolerated.
>>598481I don't know what to tell you. It's sad that someone was beaten up just because of their appearance. Still, that can happen anywhere. Either way, I would primarily blame those violent assholes and not legislators who force people to use a slightly different public facility, even if it's a stupid and harmful thing to do.
Also how sexist of you to assume that women can't beat up people, especially considering how HRT weakens muscles to a level similar to biological women.
>>598495Transgenders dont blur lines
Transgender ontology however…
>>598489>>598492the explanation for all of these things lies in the UK being run by an incestuous establishment of corrupt blairite politicians and journalists who spend half their time playing stenographer for whichever politician has the newspaper owners' mandate of heaven, and the other half churning up any old shit to bring down whoever has the mandate of hell. (Boris Johnson had to be propped up against the genuinely half-popular Corbyn, a brief invader from the outside, but once he'd outlived his usefulness - and because, poor fool, he believed he'd gotten a personal endorsement rather than gotten lucky - the tories lost the mandate… now Sir Keith is going to win a big majority.)
the toilet costs £6 because the council is bankrupt thanks to central government grants being cut back, so they've either privatized the toilet, or are desperately seeking an income source. the homelessness flows naturally from dire economic policy, a grossly underfunded welfare state, the collapse of services to help which are provided by local councils, a housing shortage - including basically no council house building - and so on. them being trans? bonus round: they're probably on a 40 year long NHS waiting list to be seen, or desperately scraping together every penny they've got to DIY their treatment, because even by the decrepit standards of the NHS, bled to death by some of the lowest health funding per head in first-world Europe combined with 30 years of tory-and-blairite schemes to let the market leeches in to suck up their share of the cash, trans healthcare is FUCKED.
thus you have a country where the Sunday Times endorses Starmer with the argument that the Conservatives (endorsed by them in 2010, 2015, 2017, 2019…) have wrecked the country with austerity since 2010, destroying public services and economic growth. gee, if only they'd known that sooner! such a shame that they only noticed when Labour were promising to stick to fiscal rules that would mandate that the austerity would continue until growth improves…
Just a quick gloss on how comically corrupt Labour are before they've even taken office:
One of Labour's current candidates (Jade Botterill) is the director of a lobbying firm which wrote the book on which Labour MPs are rising stars that people who want to buy off the government should look out for.[1] She's not the only one either - look forward to being represented by Blair McDougall, the MP for Arden Strategies. (Director: Former MP Jim Murphy), Polly Billington, MP for Hanover Communications, and Chris Ward, the MP for Hanbury Strategy… [2]
Former Labour MPs gracefully retire to become chair of the gambling lobby, then sit down for regular meetings with their Labour successor. [3] A chunk of Labour's current staff are on secondment from private sector firms as an under-the-table donation in kind [4] - and they're not going to be writing policy advice that goes against their employer's interests to help Starmer deliver on the national interest, knowing that sooner or later they'll be back to their day jobs. (See also a cameo by Mandelson, "Starmer Adviser" and chair of "Global Counsel"… you guessed it… a lobbying firm!)
1.
https://portland-communications.com/publications/starmer-s-stars-30-stand-out-candidates-set-to-make-waves-in-westminster/ See also:
https://wacomms.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WA-NEXT-LEFT-guide-to-engaging-with-Labour.pdf (do you think all those bragged-about private events with Starmer, Reeves and Sarwar were in the public interest?)
2.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2024/07/revealed-the-103-professional-lobbyists-hoping-to-become-mps (48 are Labour candidates! And that may well be an undercount - McDougall's left out!) The PR-men remember to namedrop him, however:
https://www.prweek.com/article/1878521/burson-hanover-arden-strategies-execs-bid-become-mps3.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jun/28/tory-betting-scandal-labour-gambling-industry-regulation4.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/labour-city-banks-finance-2m-donations-bankers-bonuses-u-turn-rachel-reeves/,
https://www.ft.com/content/1e01e3b9-8c40-4c39-8a49-b4f814513f98 ,
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/02/private-sector-lobbyists-embedded-into-labours-shadow-cabinet-teamsand of course, Keith himself has his hand in the cookie jar:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/keir-starmer-freebies-junkets-tottenham-hotspur-chelsea-coldplay-adele-google/>>598495Transgender shit only resists being anglo boxing because it's deeply self-contradictory. It's like a black hole of anglo discourse that distorts mutual comprehension.
As a non anglo I deeply enjoy videos of anglo conservative vs. liberal profs/politicians/activists (failing to) discuss "pregnant persons" and such.
Anglo culture is going through it's Babel phase, imo. There was this great webm of Trump vs. Hillary voters speaking in tongues at each other. That pretty much sums up this postmodern era.
>>598514>As a non anglo I deeply enjoy videos of anglo conservative vs. liberal profs/politicians/activists (failing to) discuss "pregnant persons" and such.dude, get a real hobby
go play Koei strategy games for SNES or something. Oda Nobunaga needs to unify japan.
>>598515No, do not distract him we will need him later.
We will have questions on anglo culture to ask of him.
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2024-07-02/the-parents-group-at-the-centre-of-a-rollback-of-trans-rights/The parents group at the centre of a rollback of trans rights>"An amendment to the Schools Bill is being discussed in Parliament tomorrow,” read the post on an online forum run by the Bayswater Support Group, which describes itself as the UK’s only support organisation run by and for parents of trans children and young people.>“If passed it will allow greater transparency about what is being taught in schools. We have been contacted for a short piece of evidence,” the mother said. “Does anyone have the experience of their autistic child identifying as trans following learning about it at school? Ideally a situation where the school went onto transition the child.”>The following day, on 30 June 2022, during a parliamentary debate about relationships, sex and health education (RSHE), the Conservative MP Miriam Cates argued that learning about trans identities was damaging to children.>“One parent of a 15-year-old with a diagnosis of Asperger’s syndrome said she discovered that without her knowledge, her [child’s] school had started the process of socially transitioning her child, and has continued to do so despite the mother’s objections,” said Cates, who is standing again for her seat Penistone and Stockbridge, in South Yorkshire, in the upcoming election.>The story Cates told the House of Commons closely mirrored the request posted on Bayswater’s private channel on fbi.gov, an online message board. She even named the group during the debate, saying it had reported “a surge” of parents contacting Bayswater after their children learned about trans people at school. >>598525Complacency and abstentionism is not Marx and Engels' position on how communists should act and organize during an election in a bourgeois democracy. I'll leave you with a few quotes that prove my point:
<Complete abstention from political action is impossible. The abstentionist press participates in politics every day. It is only a question of how one does it, and of what politics one engages in. For the rest, to us abstention is impossible. The working-class party functions as a political party in most countries by now, and it is not for us to ruin it by preaching abstention. Living experience, the political oppression of the existing governments compels the workers to occupy themselves with politics whether they like it or not, be it for political or for social goals. To preach abstention to them is to throw them into the embrace of bourgeois politics. The morning after the Paris Commune, which has made proletarian political action an order of the day, abstention is entirely out of the question.
<We want the abolition of classes. What is the means of achieving it? The only means is political domination of the proletariat. For all this, now that it is acknowledged by one and all, we are told not to meddle with politics. The abstentionists say they are revolutionaries, even revolutionaries par excellence. Yet revolution is a supreme political act and those who want revolution must also want the means of achieving it, that is, political action, which prepares the ground for revolution and provides the workers with the revolutionary training without which they are sure to become the dupes of the Favres and Pyats the morning after the battle. However, our politics must be working-class politics. The workers' party must never be the tagtail of any bourgeois party; it must be independent and have its goal and its own policy.
<The political freedoms, the right of assembly and association, and the freedom of the press — those are our weapons. Are we to sit back and abstain while somebody tries to rob us of them? It is said that a political act on our part implies that we accept the exiting state of affairs. On the contrary, so long as this state of affairs offers us the means of protesting against it, our use of these means does not signify that we recognise the prevailing order.
<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, "Apropos Of Working-Class Political Action".https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/09/21.htm
<Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body.
<Karl Marx and Frederick Engels , "Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League"https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm Let's not act as if there aren't good reasons to be anti-trans. Starmer (as far as I know) has policies identical to the administration so just like politicians here, the only way these people can distinguish themselves from their political rivals is to use culture wars as wedge issues. "we're both neolibs, but I will support your fight against the trans agenda" etc just means "I'm the same as the incumbent president but you should vote for me because I'm white."
>>598463>The reality is that gender essentialists like conservatards and transtards use this issue to fight over their idiotic insecure identities while the rest of us just gotta take a fucking shit and move on with our day.This. The best stance on the trans issue is no stance at all. Its an imaginary problem.
>>598495ANALytic philosophy is reactionary.
>>598536I'm not anti or pro trans. All I'm saying is I can see why some people are anti-trans. People see a handful of psychos online like keffels and then generalize to an entire group and then they see the campaign for gender neutral speech or changing school curriculums and end up putting two and two together. It makes them susceptible to right wing agitprop. Extreme fetishization of the trans cause by liberals and celebrity trans people chasing internet clout created this backlash. All right wingers have to do is point to these people. They don't even bother making an argument against trans, they just point out some dumbfuckery.
That being said, I think you can make reasonable arguments that are anti-trans but not based in human nature or anything. e.g. trans people base their ideology on gender essentialism, or you oppose it on technological grounds if your a primitivist or an ecologist etc. these can all be valid as long as they don't descend into vapid transhumanist bashing.
>>598251>Worker's party of Great Britain hates trans people >Labour party hates trans people >Communist party of Great Britain(Marxist Leninist) hates trans people >Socialist workers party is creepy towards women >Conservative party hates trans people >Reform hates trans people It's hard enough being a communist in this shithole country but everyone hates me for being trans too!
Le sigh
>>598534Any revolution will only occur if the material conditions of capitalism's crises create a class struggle that leads a country to a revolutionary situation, but this will occur with the workers being organized by a revolutionary workers' party independent of the bourgeois class with popular councils making it is unable to extract profits for itself due to a conflict of resistance internal to the country and solidarity with workers outside.
Praying for some savior outside to create the revolution is not a revolutionary position, workers benefit together if all workers' labor rights are defended including the third world against imperialism and employment is guaranteed as a public right, employment It is not something scarce created benevolently by capitalism for workers to compete against each other that capitalist hegemony maintains as natural law in common sense for the population.
>>598547I guess WPGB isn't included in the party list… I mean they weren't at the debates but they still have 1 MP so they're not totally a meme party
>>598548Har har. It's easy to pick out the Reform policies list in this because it's the one that tries to shoehorn a reference to foreigners into every single policy category
>>598550man you fucked that up bad
to be fair a lot of the policy lists are basically just 'have more good things' and 'get rid of bad things', like a policy saying 'improve standards in schools and work towards inclusion' or something like that is fucking meaningless.
>>598557Why wouldn't he last? Labour doesn't really have the same internal civil war culture that the Tories do, and Starmer has had plenty of time to purge opposition and ensure his people are in place already.
Also I could be wrong about this but I think Labour requires a membership vote to change leader unlike the Tories who only need an internal MP's vote.
>>598560anyone who talks up a new border patriot blah blah force is bad
>>598561>>598550>he only did the 3 question versionI guess some people just aren't as serious about democracy as me smh
>>598559Labour has a serious problem with right wing matey cliques who will shit everything up in a tantrum if they don't get their way. Lots of these have the most asinine disagreements but they had an autistic meltdown over Corbyn saying he would raise corporation tax by like 2% or whatever at one point. They even managed to somehow differentiate and have elaborate discussions over the ideological differences of Blair and Brown.
These people get along at the moment but they're also not really promising anything. The tantrums, leaking and backstabbing will begin when they get into power and have to actually make decisions.
>I think Labour requires a membership voteThey will just change the rules lol
Whiggism is back on the menu lads
>>598566Glad I'm not the only one who got a cursed result.
>>598568If you promise to crack down on antisemitism I'll veto your policy list in its entirety, simple as. I'm not falling for that shit.
Also a bunch of them felt like a coin flip because they were so similar as well, I guess there's just a boilerplate inoffensive policy list on some less important issues
And not to mention if someone says they'll "reform" something without just saying what the reform is, that's a minus point for them, and also weaselly stuff like "lower net immigration" - m8 it's at 800k per year I think you'd struggle to make it higher. If you're going to keep it around there then how many houses you build is irrelevant.
>>598570>If you promise to crack down on antisemitism I'll veto your policy list in its entirety, simple asKek I did the exact same. Saw that policy and immediately noped.
>Also a bunch of them felt like a coin flip because they were so similar as wellI had to select almost all of them for the health one so I could directly compare them on the same screen as they were nearly identical. The NHS funding election-time bidding war meme is real.
>also weaselly stuff like "lower net immigration" For the past three elections the Tories have pledged to bring net migration under 100k a year lol. They didn't give a number this time around because nobody would take them seriously on it.
>>598574Pretty much guaranteed if you avoid voting for certain things, like the triple lock. On crime you can vote to "fight antisemitism", make misogyny a hate crime, or vote Reform
Immigration is literally; no mention of lowering it, lower it to somewhere lower than 800k, or only let essential immigrants in (Reform)
>>598574Worker's Party was not an option, so you can't pick actual socialism.
As long as we don't have actual socialism there is no point supporting immigration - it will just be more cheap labour to be exploited.
There is also no point supporting any idpol issues, as they will just serve to sanitise the system with woke capital.
>>598581He did have SOME good policies. I still wouldn't vote for him due to the "invade our neighbours and do a few major genocides" policy, but if you assessed each policy individually I'm sure most people would be more than 0% Nazi.
>>598583The Israel lobby appears, right on time.
>>598592That did happen since he became leader. But 2017 showed that he could do decently well even with those elements against him.
It was 2019 when the North aka Red Wall abandoned him over the issue of Brexit (and antisemitism too, but that is part of the hostile party and media than the wider public).
>>598643>can someone PLEASE explain to me what these "British values" are supposed to be?British values are whatever the current ruling party wants them to be. It's like the English Constitution schizo said, Britain is a fake country which was shat into existence in the 1700s for the sake of economic convenience. It's value as a political union is to generate wealth for a ruling elite, everything else is made up as time passes.
For instance, the outgoing government claims British values include respect for all religions and appreciating multiculturalism, but I doubt that is what Reform have in mind when they talk about British values. You could maybe make the argument that Christian values are linked to British values, but that never gets mentioned because only a minority of the country are practising Christians, and even they are split between Protestants and Catholics (who have very different values). It's the kind of initiative you see in either newly independent countries trying to form a national identity, or heavily fractured countries (eg. Yugoslavia) which are desperately trying to hold themselves together.
>>598644>S poster is an ANGLOI fucking knew it. Explains all the anti-Russian and anti-China chauvinism. You people really can't get over the fact that your empire crumbled and still have the elitist mindset.
I visited England once on a school trip. The fucking security held me up because they were bored and spent 10 minutes asking me pointless questions while smirking because they knew I couldn't protest. You all deserve another 100 years of Conservative governments. You treat visitors like absolute trash so it's only fair that you lot get treated like trash in return. Disgusting scumbags who should be nuked with an absolutely undeserved superiority complex. I shudder to imagine how much worse I would have been treated if I wasn't white.
Corbyn should have promised to keep Trident for the sole purpose of turning England to glass.
>>598649HAHAHAHA some thirdie/euroqueer is still seething so hard about getting held up in airport security for
10 MINUTES years ago that he wrote this entire post. The absolute state.
>>598632English Patriots are in control. Back to the Glory of the Tudors!
>>5986431. What did your dad say about Bri'ish values?
2. As far as I'm concerned, they are: having a pint at the local with your mates, watching Match of the Day and/or Ant&Dec and/or Strictly Come Dancing on Saturday, going at the commons to play cricket on Sunday, having a portrait of the King in your living room, possibly even one of the late and much beloved Queen, wearing a flat cap, never having an umbrella even if it rains almost everyday, having mushy peas and fish fingers for dinner most days.
>>598671Well, at least it's not the usual London stabbing…
>>598672Problem here is local libs are going to celebrate to stick it to the fascists in government, while sunday evening it will happen the opposite re. France. Also, the lib-ber faction of the libs is going to celebrate the fact that a "responsible, pro-nato, pro-i@@@@l, competent left" is the only one winning in a continent almost dominated by the le fascist populist right.
>>5986731. They were cucked by a revolution explicitly calling itself islamic, with a leader that looked liked Sean Connery and was undoubtedly cooler than their boorish "shah".
2. They probably larp as le based aryan zoroastrian vs le foreign arab religion.
3. They seek to curry favour with groups and interests in the west that already play the anti-islam card - one of the most prominent being the zionists.
>>598677I hope the libdems actually overtake the tories and they become the official opposition. You could say in some respect they are less shitty than both labour and the conservatives. Also, I love their leader's campaign stunts, they are a blast compared to two grim guys like Sunak and Starmer. Apparently I was wrong about Reform having their day, because fptp will still work against them and avoid a total tory annihilation. I'm not complaining about that, because in the end Reform is a far right party and Farage is a fucking rat, even if he's clever and in some ways he managed to be extremely influental in Bri'ish politics even without ever having any substantial presence in Westminster. Which is a lesson on the limits of electoralism and the virtues of other ways of playing the political game. Sure, he always had substantial sectors of Bri'ish financial capital behind him.
That said, I've read many of the campaign promises, and even Reform sounds to the left of like 99% of the political landscape here in Wopistan, for fuck's sake.
>>598680Well, that's some campaign leaflet!
>>598682It makes everything look like the flag of Romania or Chad.
>>598683And the beginning of a new one.
>>598643It's something that was put into the curriculum at the behest of flag nonces. Anyone who has thought about it for more than 5 minutes, including the kids, realises that there is absolutely no value unique to the UK. However, you kind of need to make something up for the sake of the national identity myth.
Also re: Rule of Law, did you know that criticising the Rule of Law or Democracy is grounds to get you referred to Prevent? Be careful what you talk about in the classroom, folks!
>>598643they're drivel which, for the most part, nobody objects to. (exceptions like free speech, nobody seriously believes in.)
the problem is that we've been mentally colonized by yanks. contra
>>598645 britain has the problem that it's
not a generic state founded for profit (aus, nz) or on "an idea" (America), the reason "Britain" exists is the arbitrary whim of history: it was not founded because Athelstan got everyone together to agree a statement of values. it's hundreds of years of murderous thieving warlords fucking about and finding out, beheading the king before the french only to bring his son back almost immediately(!) a bit of bullying and bribery to bring the scots in, an empire, an attempted developmentalist nation state 1945-76, an abortive neoliberal tax haven, a decrepit joke.
trying to pick out actual values winds up tripping you up: if our values are free enterprise, why do we have the NHS? if they're more communal, why are the rivers full of shit? if our values are more historical, why is london a multicultural world city? if they're local character, why are our politics so centralised? if you could pull something from the messy soup of our history, it would look ugly to many eyes - something like the "law of jante" which the outsider finds bizarre and scary. so we prevaricate, we try to do the american thing by focus group so as to not leave anyone out: our values are uh… fairness… goodness… respectfulness… (it's not exactly "liberty, equality, fraternity", is it?)
>>1905141the medication in question is trivial generics, "pharma marketshare" is an utterly retarded explanation. yeah, big pharma decided that making a fraction of the population trans to boost the sales of generic medication widely available even in third world shitholes, widely demanded by 50% of the population already, because apparently the brightest brains in the world really, really, really need a rounding error of a revenue boost and couldn't come up with something as simple as: slightly up the dose prescribed to cis women. (ah, but that would boost revenue too much - what would the capitalists do with
that much extra cash?! no no, they need to be subtle - and to be subtle, they have to kick off a massive public culture war that only geniuses like yourself can figure out the true motivations for.)
>>598698that's true, but most of them have different brainworms and a more functional state, so they don't put out statements of more-or-less universal values as though they're "ours" (which nations are
proudly undemocratic, disrespectful, intolerant, criminal, and illiberal? even ISIS would argue they're respectful and follow the rule of law…)
>lower Labour seats than 1997/2001haha
it'll sound like cope, but really: hahahaha.
the most boring possible result.
>>598701that isn't good. they're cunts but they're losing to substantially worse, more genocidal cunts.
>>598693Typical radlib shit. It's telling that his main complaint about living at home is that
>"you should be out enjoying your twenties, throwing parties, having loads of sex, making a name for yourself…" (9:55)illustrated with a clip from Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. My man, your life is not a Hollywood film. Nobody's is. Fucking get over yourself.
>>598685>2. As far as I'm concerned, they are: having a pint at the local with your mates, watching Match of the Day and/or Ant&Dec and/or Strictly Come Dancing on Saturday, going at the commons to play cricket on Sunday, having a portrait of the King in your living room, possibly even one of the late and much beloved Queen, wearing a flat cap, never having an umbrella even if it rains almost everyday, having mushy peas and fish fingers for dinner most days.Absolutely mental. The woke mob is trying to erase 24 hour drinking, bags of cocaine, and football. Are Nige will make all these things mandertory.
>>598707With the framing of it, yes. You should be able to have fun, but he's idealising it, clinging onto the myths about adolescence and early adulthood he was sold by the media. The whole idea of having your own home and going crazy with drugs and partying in your 20s (nothing is said about ages 30+, though there's nothing stopping you listening to live music or whatever after the age of 29) is fairly new. The fact that this is what's bothering him tells me that his anger at the status quo is reactionary, i.e. he wouldn't care about the injustices of the world if he were getting sucked off in Tesco car park high on Cocaine every weekend.
What's more, he says earlier on that he was in year 3 in 2007, which makes him about 24 now. He hasn't even lived through his fucking 20s yet, so he still has plenty of time to enjoy life.
>>598729LDs are backstabbers, but they're competing against backstabbers
>>598730At least my position that the UK should be totally destroyed and rebuilt has been vindicated. Long live acceleration!
>>598719they'll keep to their fiscal rules by doing everything via crooked PFI contracts. public services and a few indicators will briefly improve (NHS waiting times, for example, may fall), but at a grotesquely inflated cost (for example: NHS hospitals being owned by blackrock, NHS staff doing an 80/20 work-share with private firms…). when the right eventually get back in, they'll probably use this profligacy as an excuse to further strip back what's already in public hands.
see
>>598503 for how openly Labour've already been bought.
>>598745it's possible, but this poll is from last week or so.
1 independent candidate is predicted to win their seat, but i can't find a seat-by-seat breakdown for the BBC's exit poll anywhere.
>>598733Yes the tories are finished
They have been subsumed into the blairist uniparty, where blair himself is the formal successor of margaret thatcher
Now that the right have real representatives, they cant keep up by pandering since they *are* the centre of british politics
Sky News lets you look at their exit poll on their site.
Islington North: too close to call
Rochdale: 99% chance of Labour hold. (but doesn't seem to factor that there was a by-election, just notes they won it in 2019.)
https://news.sky.com/story/exit-poll-what-is-the-forecast-election-result-in-my-constituency-13163180>>598781FPTP voting system, councils have no money and fairly limited power, devolved assemblies already have "left of labour" taken by their respective nationalists and the greens, all of these are a challenge even for a well organized party.
then you can work in that the left really just aren't that good at organizing in the form of a party. taking silly, posturing stances, miles away from anything they can actually influence is fun and makes you feel powerful. building a support base in an area takes work that nobody wants to do - they just want the fun bit where they draw up the party policy on air transport or culture war issues. even if they could avoid these pitfalls, they'd have the problem of having no money, and all the problems above.
the other route would be for an MP to defect to one of their parties and create it top down (maybe Corbyn?), but then the party'd almost certainly just be a brittle one-man electoral vehicle. even then, as with galloway and RESPECT, it might break down in infighting farce.
>>598790If it's a bit like the French elections, it's because the right wants some really edgy right-wing measures right now, and the left wants just something that looks like a socialist party in power because they have been tired of the equivalent of US neocons with monarchist characteristics for the last 20 years
in order to cope forever.
>>598797there is one, which is running 16 candidates:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_of_Women(pretty much every stupid joke party will get more votes than them)
>>598806this was true in 1997 and turnout was 71%, or in 2017 a May victory seemed inevitable, yet it was 68.8%. but then Blair was at least pretending to offer "new life for britain" rather than garbage like "stability is change"
>>598808a better view would be that this is not a democracy.
contrast - say - NZ, a functioning bourgeois democracy. two mostly identical parties with slightly different support bases playing against one another in actually competitive elections. depressing to the leftist, sure, but compare it to Britain where sir keith is going to get a 1997 tier majority on harold shipman tier enthusiasm.
>>598842Nightmare mode in a GE, there's a reason serious upstarts who understand the political system chip away at councilors for years
Residents' Associations don't even have an MP despite being one of the biggest local groups, and the Greens spent a long time chipping away at Bristol
>>598852Hope the dribbling dunces who were shilling for Workers Party have a moment of self-reflection.
Social conservatives belong in the gulag
>>598859>Galloway too fucking lazy to even campaignI am going to be brutally honest with everyone:
At this point I'm just a cauldron of boiling hate that wants to kill everyone in politics.
I just want to kill everyone that has engaged with the political system at any level.
I want to kill the MPs
I want to kill the civil servants
I want to kill the candidates
I want to kill the party members
I want to kill the fringe parties
I want to kill the voters
I'm actually just a completely nihilistic retard who wants everyone in politics dead at this point
>>598893might come back to you later
>>598894if it's only in the service of the same agenda (as starmer fucking sunak is) it's of no benefit
>>598903Ugh, what could have been
>>598911Hope a lone wolf kills him
>>5989341997 2.0, incredibly funny for being so fucking boring. canada 1993? no, we're not as interesting as
canada, the kid who collects stamps.
>>59893870% no change, 30% bad in that it signifies the move to the next phase of the eternal blairite program - wes streeting handing the NHS over to private investors, taking advantage of labour being more trusted on that matter than the conservatives.
the tl;dr is that this is a managed democracy where a historically unpopular labour party (it looks like they'll poll as badly as in 2005, with a massive crash in turnout, meaning much lower vote numbers than 2017 and maybe even 2015) has been propped up by the press and the bafflingly suspicious reform party (not a real party, a private company…) splitting the conservative vote. (only to itself get attacked by the press when it looked like they might actually replace the conservatives!)
>>598947their manifesto is basically the sparknotes version of the 2017 labour manifesto with added TERF dogwhistles and removed explanations of
how they'll actually deliver the promises (because even if they were, by some miracle, elected, they'd be irrelevant - and more than a little confused), scrawled onto 4 sheets of A5 paper. they're a joke party, and the OMRL have already got that market sewn up. at least the CPGB-ML commit to the LARP.
>>598938Pros:
>Conservative Party on the brink of extinction>combined Labour/Conservative popular vote extremely low>Corbyn kept seatCons:
>Labour government>Galloway lost seat >>598952Showing 1997 helps with that narrative, but reminding people about 2017 is dangerous: what are the implications of more people being willing to vote for Corbyn than for Starmer? at the moment it's even possible that Starmer has less votes than Corbyn in
2019, which makes a farce of the whole thing.
For a contrast see their Scottish coverage, where they talk about the 2015 and 2019 results but ignore 2017, where the SNP fucked up and fell back to ~35 seats. But they ignore that because it's inconvenient for a narrative of a straight-line labour recovery that doesn't include comical self-sabotage.
>>598954>but reminding people about 2017 is dangerous: what are the implications of more people being willing to vote for Corbyn than for Starmer?That's an irrelevance for most people, despite the outpouring of support for Corbyn in 2017 and the very poor result for May,
Corbyn lost so that proves he is
unelectable while
Starmer won so that proves he is electable by larping as a particularly boring brand of Tory.
It's simply that binary for people I'm afraid, considerations about how a given candidate won and to what extent people actually support what was offered just doesn't really matter, I promise you that the fact Corbyn got more votes and oversaw the biggest swell in party size in recent history while Starmer over saw it's biggest shrink, will never create a resurgence in Corbynist politics now that Starmer has "proven" Britain just wants a more competent Tory party while the actual Tory party sorts itself out or collapses and assimilated nto Reform UK.
>>598956I don't think most people care either way really. The people who're going to go with "starmer won" are going to be patently stupid establishment ghouls and Blairite dads. 5 years of discourse pissing in their cereal, eh, it's going to be more novel than relitigating 2017 again.
for the wider electorate, the fun comes in 2 years when the press start going: "The Hubris of Mr. Starmer…. on a worse result than Corbyn, he was strutting around like Blair… of course he's now polling somewhat 15 points less popular than syphilis"
>>598960Well so far, the independents have been pro-palestine to my knowledge so pretty much the former thankfully
And another thing, what's going on with the last 6 seats yet to declare lmao
>>598960they're all single-issue candidates standing on the Gaza issue. standard northern/ midlands inner city muslim working class background.
i dont think anyone has a clue what their economic policy is, and theyll likely all be socially very very conservative just like galloway.
>>598924>>598884Trust leftypol to be fans of that rat fuck Corbyn.
>>598866>Social conservatives belong in the gulagArticle 121 and history itself, shows who was thrown in the gulag
>>5989581966 again. Don't give up hope.
>>598962>theyll likely all be socially very very conservative just like gallowayGood. No more idpol. Just organised labour.
>>598963>rat fuck CorbynHe is better than New Labour. You have to count your blessings.
>>598927Bri'ish women are underrated tbhq
t: connaisseur
>>598962This is a stereotype, if you look at the direction Abrahamic religions like Juadism, Islam and Christianity are going in, at least the followers, in a more socially progressive socially tolerant route for the younger population.
And Religion is more or less just a identity label for many people today, I do not believe most people who assign themselves to X Religion are devout, most will be agnostic.
Gaza and Palestine was the big issue today, this is not a negative, foreign exploitation can reveal the enemies here.
>>598756All you white people assume brown people are a hivemind, as if those who voted WPB aren't nuanced or might think Galloway should not have been socially conservative, yet his message on Palestine is too important, the genocide abroad reveals the enemies here.
And are there are no LGBT Asians, etc… retard?
>>5989913 other anti-zionist independents beat labour, tories and reform did worse than the exit poll predicted, libdems and greens did better, greens got all 4 of their target seats. Turnout is down a lot and Labour pretty hugely underperformed the polls, getting only 1% or so more than in 2019, and a lot less actual votes due to turnout, with things stangnant or down everywhere except scotland due to SNP crashing.
They're calling it the most strong and stable majority of all time.
>>598977>All you white people are the same!>Also how dare you think all Muslims vote the same!I hope you can look at this and see the irony in what you just posted.
>But what about progressive LGBT Muslims?Yes these exist in the UK but everyone knows they are a very small group within the wider British Muslim community
Queer Muslims aren't representative of the average British Muslim.
I really hope some of you have learned the lesson that the existing socialists are worthless and can't do shit even when everyone hates the system. There are real options there for us though but you've got to move past this rubbish and choose the hard road of building a real communist party.
>>598765It was a foregone conclusion so why are you cursing the people? They didn't want Starmer but they got him anyway. Hating the masses won't get us anywhere.
>>598970replacing Tories with Tories is lame
>>5989881. they're not the conservatives
2. they're very aggressive about local issues. they're incredible opportunists.
>>598997parties are the problem. even electorally. they invite the wasting of resources and distraction from fundamental, practical issues to focus on posturing.
Galloway had a party, Corbyn did not. Which one held his seat? Why did several independents make gains, while microparties did not?
even if you can't give up parties in the long run, in the short and medium term with class consciousness as low as it is, organizations should focus on immediate practical matters and not on LARPing.
>>598995Retard do you know the difference between Asians and Muslims, Many are and many are not, are all those who identify as Muslim even practicing or devout?
You are just stupid
>>598994>a third of Tory voters went to ReformIt's an absolute stain on the character of the British left that a similar phenomenon has not happened with the Workers Party.
>assuming that won't be replicatedIt very likely will, because Farage is an MP now. Last time he got elected (to the European Parliament) he kept his seat for 21 years and only took 17 of those to get a referendum on something the establishment did not want to change. The only weakness Reform have is their reliance on his cult of personality, but they will live at least as long as he does.
The only comparable figure on the left is Galloway, but he is 10 years older so he doesn't have as much time left to build a serious party structure around him. Corbyn is even older.
>Labour are fucked in 2029If you want this to be true you have to get some young talent into left wing alternatives and get seriously organised. It won't just happen on its own.
>>598996You have blood on your hands.
Unique IPs: 185