Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    Point taken. But I don't see the need to play dirty when where's a perfectly valid alternative available, i.e good old fashioned political debate. And if you don't like that sort of thing then perhaps the Politics section of TSR isn't for you. Simple.
    True there is a valid alternative which is structured and intelligent debate which is something that everyone would stick to...in an ideal world. Since such a place doesn't exist both in real life and especially on the interwebz then you have to adapt. I do put out a structured and intelligent debate where and when I can and if someone proves to enjoy low blows or acting like a **** then I am sometimes prone to go down to their level and unashamedly so because I don't act exactly like them. I tend to use sarcasm and be incredibly patronising, first subtly then increasingly so. But that's just how I deal with it, and I tend to do it straight away more and more rather than complaining that people act that way. I think it's pretty naive for some people here to do just that, after all it's the internet. There are people all over that are like that and there probably always will be.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I'm really trying to address the creation of a daily tidal wave of basically identical new threads by the same half-dozen posters, not to mention encouraging these idiots by responding to them in those threads.
    Okay. You seem to have a pretty irrational hatred of sourcing the right wing press in OPs. Let's have a look at threads started by you where you source a newspaper source and which newspaper sources you source?

    George Osborne likes to park in disabled bays Mirror
    Labour Supporting Duncan Smith in defending slave work at poundland Guardian
    Boris gets a monstering on live TV Telegraph
    The BBC: Endless Campaign against the BBC by the rest of the media Daily Mail
    Google Glasses - Orwellian Surveillance Telegraph
    President has the right to use drones on Americans Telegraph
    Pick a Pope Guardian
    Berlusconi sentenced to a year in prison Telegraph
    Lord Sugar on the Apprentice "I do it for the PR and don't give a **** Daily Mail
    Essex Blonde 16 Einsteen IQ Telegraph
    Italy (and Europe) in hands of comedic buffoon Guardian
    No triple dip recession because there wasn't a double-dip Telegraph
    Forcing unemployed graduates to work in poundland illegal Guardian
    Obsessive Compulsive cleaners Telegraph
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=2256637 Guardian

    Guardianista with regular right wing press sourcing (Telegraph and Mail) criticises right wing factions on TSR. Well, you would know.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It's a shame, because as I said, it effectively shuts down TSR as a gathering point for students to discuss their concerns about this government's policies and their sustained attacks on the poor, the disabled and working people. This is clearly the aim of the said group of posters, they intend to make the UK political forum unusable. Judging from a number of comments, people agree that this is putting them off coming here and joining discussions.
    Do you basically just want an echo-chamber then, and pats on the back all round for everyone having the correct opinion.

    I'm sure that there are plenty of other forums which you can join to do just that, but as this forum is a place for all students to primarily discuss life in education and university applications, it doesn't aim to specially cater for specific political view points. This isn't a Student and Young Labour Supporters political activism forum.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Okay. You seem to have a pretty irrational hatred of sourcing the right wing press in OPs. Let's have a look at threads started by you where you source a newspaper source and which newspaper sources you source?

    George Osborne likes to park in disabled bays Mirror
    Labour Supporting Duncan Smith in defending slave work at poundland Guardian
    Boris gets a monstering on live TV Telegraph
    The BBC: Endless Campaign against the BBC by the rest of the media Daily Mail
    Google Glasses - Orwellian Surveillance Telegraph
    President has the right to use drones on Americans Telegraph
    Pick a Pope Guardian
    Berlusconi sentenced to a year in prison Telegraph
    Lord Sugar on the Apprentice "I do it for the PR and don't give a **** Daily Mail
    Essex Blonde 16 Einsteen IQ Telegraph
    Italy (and Europe) in hands of comedic buffoon Guardian
    No triple dip recession because there wasn't a double-dip Telegraph
    Forcing unemployed graduates to work in poundland illegal Guardian
    Obsessive Compulsive cleaners Telegraph
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=2256637 Guardian

    Guardianista with regular right wing press sourcing (Telegraph and Mail) criticises right wing factions on TSR. Well, you would know.
    I choose sources deliberately that avoid the usual 'Guardian spokes***** feminist' allegation. Having said that, it's getting harder to find quality in the Tory press! The Telegraph has just hired Kelvin MacKenzie(!) and the Mail seems to have given up fact checking altogether, as opposed to just from time to time.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tpx)
    Do you basically just want an echo-chamber then, and pats on the back all round for everyone having the correct opinion.

    I'm sure that there are plenty of other forums which you can join to do just that, but as this forum is a place for all students to primarily discuss life in education and university applications, it doesn't aim to specially cater for specific political view points. This isn't a Student and Young Labour Supporters political activism forum.
    Not at all, a little more variety would be useful though, it would make a change from scroungers/immigrants stories.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    I choose sources deliberately that avoid the usual 'Guardian spokes***** feminist' allegation. Having said that, it's getting harder to find quality in the Tory press! The Telegraph has just hired Kelvin MacKenzie(!) and the Mail seems to have given up fact checking altogether, as opposed to just from time to time.
    Given you're rather outspoken opinion on right wing opinion and in particular the Mail in this thread the fact you use right wing press and in particular the Mail as a legitimate source substantially weakens the point you're trying to make. You also seem to have mastered the art of hyperbolic thread titles designed to provoke right wingers which is somewhat ironic.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Given you're rather outspoken opinion on right wing opinion and in particular the Mail in this thread the fact you use right wing press and in particular the Mail as a legitimate source substantially weakens the point you're trying to make. You also seem to have mastered the art of hyperbolic thread titles designed to provoke right wingers which is somewhat ironic.
    Not really, I only use the Mail when the story either highlights their absurdity or is intrinsically funny. I don't hate the Mail to the core of my soul! I just find it sometimes ridiculous, sometimes to be fair entertaining and sometimes a hate-filled ghastly disgusting pit of filthy lies.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Redolent)
    Firstly no part of leftism entails opposition to free speech or support for censorship, hence your points there address specific factions and are irrelevant to the wider debate. Secondly a lot of what you have written is just wilful ignorance.

    Western civilisation as a whole has been drifting to a more conventionally left-wing position for decades if not centuries. It has reached the point now where being socially right-wing, especially in the extreme way that the Victorians were, has become such a toxic idea to the majority of people that left-wing and right-wing have had to be pretty much redefined in a context that refers purely to "economic liberalism". It was the conservatives of the right who continually fought to preserve archaic and arbitrary social hierarchies (such as black slavery in America) on the grounds that it was "natural", even the classical liberals so many right-wingers seem have suddenly found a liking for identified themselves as left-wing. It was also the left who helped sort out the dreadful situation for the workers in coal mines and so on, who were dying on an awful scale due to cost-cutting on safety in the name of efficiency. And it's thanks to broadly left-wing political philosophy that situations like the one I was reading about yesterday (where a highly respected American musician died in huge debt because he could not fund treatment of his rare medical condition) are avoided here, because there is enough solidarity left in society that the majority of people are happy to pay to protect each other from nasty unforeseen circumstances like that. All of this without mentioning that higher degrees of economic equality in a country are correlated with just about every positive measure of societal success there is. To say the left have a bad track record as if that is somehow objectively verifiable is just ridiculous, and clearly you don't want to look beyond the last few years of New Labour (who weren't that left-wing) for that claim.

    I say all this as someone who identifies as centre-left at most.
    In terms of free speech you're deeply confused. In my experience liberals tend to believe that free speech poses a threat to minorities because empiricism can be used to undermine marginal cultures, so they've developed two categories of speech: 'free' speech -which includes everything they agree with - and 'hate' speech -i.e opinions and ideas they disagree with. If you label an entire sub-set of ideas 'hate' and then attempt to ban then on the grounds of social cohesion you're not in favour of free speech, in fact you're probably a bigot.

    Also your knowledge of history is woeful. The Labour Party weren't created until 1900 so the left as we know it couldn't have been responsible for the abolition of slavery which was outlawed some 100 years earlier in 1807 when the Tories dominated parliament. Furthermore landmark acts like the 1832 Representation of the People's Act which widened the Franchise to the common man were introduced by a combination of Whigs and Tories, both of whom would baulk at the idea of being compared with the modern liberal-left. New Labour etc may identify with victims and purport to represent them but I don't think an analysis of the facts supports your claims, even if you want to talk about H&S in the coal mining industry you cannot overlook Thatcher who did much more for miners' safety by closing down the mines than the Unions ever did. But lets not let the facts get in the way, right?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Not really, I only use the Mail when the story either highlights their absurdity or is intrinsically funny. I don't hate the Mail to the core of my soul! I just find it sometimes ridiculous, sometimes to be fair entertaining and sometimes a hate-filled ghastly disgusting pit of filthy lies.
    Okay I'll put my point slightly less nicely as you're missing it - you appear to be trying to control debate on TSR just as much as the right wingers. You're sourcing right-wing newspapers isn't helping you're argument here. Especially as you appear to be trying to control debate on TSR towards the left of centre. I must then assume you're part of some left wing faction trying to control TSR. Using exactly the same reasons as you to used to point towards a right wing faction.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Not at all, a little more variety would be useful though, it would make a change from scroungers/immigrants stories.
    I think that you'll just have to ignore those posts though. I understand that when you create you're own threads and people like ChefDave post in them it is harder to ignore, but that is a problem with political views: people feel very strongly about them and can be very insistent and rude when anonymous on the internet.

    But I don't think that there is much that can be done on this forum, which is politically neutral and doesn't censor non-extreme political views (in terms of spread and popularity, anti-immigration views are not particularly extreme or unusual). You seem to fall into a trap that lots of people in student politics do: assuming that those students that are politically active and opinionated, who are almost exclusively left-wing, are a balanced representation of the political views of all students. And therefore you assume that a politics subforum on a student forum would be specifically set up to enable purely positive discussion the favoured views of student politics, such as pro-immigration, reclaim your education, and pro public spending.

    It also doesn't help when you imply that these views are part of a strategy by right-wing groups to steer debate on TSR, particularly when you do this on the same day that you post a sensationalist, unbalanced story about George Osborne.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)

    Also your knowledge of history is woeful. The Labour Party weren't created until 1900 so the left as we know it couldn't have been responsible for the abolition of slavery which was outlawed some 100 years earlier in 1807 when the Tories dominated parliament.
    You think the "left" was invented when the Labour Party was formed?? It seems to be you who have a fairly woeful lack of history. Also you strongly imply that it was the right that ended the slave trade, a travesty of the truth - reactionaries in Parliament vigorously opposed all attempts to put a stop to it for decades.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tpx)
    It also doesn't help when you imply that these views are part of a strategy by right-wing groups to steer debate on TSR, particularly when you do this on the same day that you post a sensationalist, unbalanced story about George Osborne.
    The Telegraph is now covering it fully, suggesting that the story is not just some wierd attempt by me to sensationalise a non-story, which has been the repeated allegation so far.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...rking-bay.html

    EDIT: Full coverage in the Mail as well now.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-Big-Mac.html

    Richard Hawkes, chief executive of the disability charity Scope said that the incident showed how ‘wildly out of touch the Chancellor is with disabled people in the UK’. The use of the bay was ‘rubbing salt in the wounds’ of people suffering under the welfare reforms, Mr Hawkes added.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Right now we have massive government attacks on the poor and the Tories are using the police as a tool to brutally suppress protest. A couple of years ago they used it against students in London on a massive scale and against the very popular UK Uncut tax protests - the cases arising from that are still going on. Few causes have as much popular support as the campaign to end massive tax avoidance by corporations, yet despite Coalition blather on the subject, little is being truly done to clamp down on it. Today we have the news that directors of more than 175,000 UK companies are based in tax havens. Enough money is kept in tax havens to provide for the entire government spending of the United States and Japan for a year!

    TSR political threads are not reflecting this reality. Instead, we have a regular blizzard of Daily Mail-influenced thread titles, attacking so-called 'scroungers', trying to paint the poor as undeserving, attacking immigrants and all the rest of the usual far-right message that the poor and immigrants are to blame for our woes, the biggest lie of many lies that the Tories are currently telling.

    This is now such a regular pattern that the UK politics forum appears to be almost dead in the water - most posters are bogged down arguing with people who appear to be wholly committed to the EDL/BNP/Ukip lines. So much so, that we must ask the question - are these organisations seeking to control debate on TSR? Is TSR willing to allow this to continue? Is it what we really want?
    Firstly, the BNP are left wing. So more like Lab/Lib than UKIP im afraid. :rolleyes:

    Secondly thank you for showing your true authoritarian colours. Seeking to turn TSR into your left wing heaven, but casting doubt over the legitimacy of the right is simply short sighted.

    If you don't like what I or what other people ideologically aligned with me have to say, then don't respond. Or how about this radical notion. Start you own threads, then you can control the direction of debate. But please, just please! Quit this incessant whining, you attempt to fish for sympathy here is simply shows that you have nothing of value to say.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    You think the "left" was invented when the Labour Party was formed?? It seems to be you who have a fairly woeful lack of history. Also you strongly imply that it was the right that ended the slave trade, a travesty of the truth - reactionaries in Parliament vigorously opposed all attempts to put a stop to it for decades.
    The left didn't manage to mobilise themselves as a effective political force until 1900 with the advent of the Labour Party. Before then parliament was dominated by paternalistic Tories and small state Whigs neither of whom have anything whatsoever to do with the left. The Whigs identified with Adam Smith for goodness sake who is pretty much the anti-christ as far as socialists are concerned, yet it was a Whig who led the 1807 Bill through the lower chamber. Can you be more precise and explain exactly how the left abolished slavery when they weren't even a recognised entity in the UK?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    The left didn't manage to mobilise themselves as a effective political force until 1900 with the advent of the Labour Party. Before then parliament was dominated by paternalistic Tories and small state Whigs neither of whom have anything whatsoever to do with the left. The Whigs identified with Adam Smith for goodness sake who is pretty much the anti-christ as far as socialists are concerned, yet it was a Whig who led the 1807 Bill through the lower chamber. Can you be more precise and explain exactly how the left abolished slavery when they weren't even a recognised entity in the UK?
    But it must have been lefties, because they did a good thing and all non-lefties are evil, right? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zürich)
    But it must have been lefties, because they did a good thing and all non-lefties are evil, right? :rolleyes:
    Tee hee I think that pretty much sums up the crux of her argument.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    The left didn't manage to mobilise themselves as a effective political force until 1900 with the advent of the Labour Party. Before then parliament was dominated by paternalistic Tories and small state Whigs neither of whom have anything whatsoever to do with the left. The Whigs identified with Adam Smith for goodness sake who is pretty much the anti-christ as far as socialists are concerned, yet it was a Whig who led the 1807 Bill through the lower chamber. Can you be more precise and explain exactly how the left abolished slavery when they weren't even a recognised entity in the UK?
    For once I agree with you.

    Calling the Whigs left-wing is kinda like calling the Democrats left-wing. Left-wing in comparison to their opposition maybe, but not in the true sense of the word.

    (and yes, I'm fully aware that many people will find this post ironic due to how 'right-wing' Labour are these days, but personally I think that's a load of rubbish )
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Okay I'll put my point slightly less nicely as you're missing it - you appear to be trying to control debate on TSR just as much as the right wingers. You're sourcing right-wing newspapers isn't helping you're argument here. Especially as you appear to be trying to control debate on TSR towards the left of centre. I must then assume you're part of some left wing faction trying to control TSR. Using exactly the same reasons as you to used to point towards a right wing faction.
    I think thats a fair enough point, but if Fullofsurpises is also a shill what the hell are we going to do about it?

    I think this calls for one of those honest debate thingamies.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by chefdave)
    The left didn't manage to mobilise themselves as a effective political force until 1900 with the advent of the Labour Party. Before then parliament was dominated by paternalistic Tories and small state Whigs neither of whom have anything whatsoever to do with the left. The Whigs identified with Adam Smith for goodness sake who is pretty much the anti-christ as far as socialists are concerned, yet it was a Whig who led the 1807 Bill through the lower chamber. Can you be more precise and explain exactly how the left abolished slavery when they weren't even a recognised entity in the UK?
    If memory serves me, whilst it was a Whig who got it through parliament this was only after heavy ground work and at least one attempt by Pitt The Younger who served as both Tory and Whig Prime Minister. A great historical PM if you ask me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by n00)
    I think thats a fair enough point, but if Fullofsurpises is also a shill what the hell are we going to do about it?

    I think this calls for one of those honest debate thingamies.
    I think you're missing the point. We could probably claim that every member of TSR who posts in D&CA more than three times belongs to some faction or other using this sort of logic the reality is the vast majority don't communicate with other members outside of debating with each other and the supposed factions are just people with too much time on their hands seeking a reaction. Given that every member on this site is posting their beliefs and opinions to seek some sort of reaction, we can then prove that every member of TSR is a troll and the vast majority of TSR are shills.

    Obviously this claim is utter nonsense but it's no more utter nonsense than Fullofsurprises original point.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.