|
baka kaba posted:Hey Ober, I just read your Tupas bit so far, it's v good. Is the second half done yet or what?? And yeah, the thing is riddled with typos and I do mean to go back and correct them but then I'm like...... eh. I probably would've missed that one as I went through doing corrections though, so thanks! e: and I got a copy of "The Tupamaros Guerrillas - The Structure and Strategy of the Urban Guerrilla movement" in the mail yesterday and it features a bunch of contemporary interviews with members of the public and imprisoned guerrillas. It's going to be super useful for the next specific bit I want to write so... yaaaay communism bitch fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Dec 27, 2015 |
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 03:16 |
|
|
If the rumours are right (& the rumours on Jeremy Corbyn don't exactly seem solid, the press's Labour contacts all seem to be Blairites) then it'd be a really stupid move by Corbyn because he doesn't have the PLP support to have an ideologically pure shadow cabinet. You don't want to end up with leftists in every shadow cabinet position & the only leftist backbencher left is Dennis Skinner. That gets ugly quickly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Also this, if a guy wins the leadership election with 60% of the vote, doesn't that make him by-default the moderate of the party? Because the majority of the party support his position? The narrative is that the Labour party membership (or the majority of it that support Corbyn) are all loony lefties while the 'moderates' represent the mainstream voter, the mythical Centre Ground'. It always leaves me wondering what exactly the point of party membership is in this scenario? If the PLP 'moderates' don't agree with the membership and don't want to represent their views, in fact actually fight against those views, why should the membership continue to support the Labour Party? It just get handwaved away with the expectation that the membership should shut up and do as they're told without even a fig-leaf attempt at reasoning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Random Integer posted:The narrative is that the Labour party membership (or the majority of it that support Corbyn) are all loony lefties while the 'moderates' represent the mainstream voter, the mythical Centre Ground'. It always leaves me wondering what exactly the point of party membership is in this scenario? If the PLP 'moderates' don't agree with the membership and don't want to represent their views, in fact actually fight against those views, why should the membership continue to support the Labour Party? It just get handwaved away with the expectation that the membership should shut up and do as they're told without even a fig-leaf attempt at reasoning. I've heard exactly this argument from an old guard guy. The MP won't support the loony leftie actions because he's there to represent the whole electorate not just the party. Well, yes, but he's also there to represent the party, that's who put him there in the first place, and enough of his constituency voted for him under the Labour flag to give him the seat, so... If you're concerned about minority rule (and you should be) the answer isn't to make the FPTP leader have insanely contradictory goals, it's to loving reform FPTP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:No but I've got a bottle of jagermeister and I'm partly naked, and this usually augurs well for me doing some writing. Yeah that's the only reason I mentioned it, I saw it a couple of times and figured you might have misread it or something. How naked are we talking here? Dan Mitrione popping up again reminds me of classic torture pop songs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmRVU-MEXU0
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I still find it hilarious that Corb and Abbott apparently hosed in the past. Because? I mean this was 30 years ago. Or do you have an objection to miscegenation perhaps?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Seems that it would be in the interest of those in the shadow cabinet (who know that they would have been kicked out ages ago for a fraction of their leaking and disloyalty if they'd been in a previous cabinet) to poison the well for a reshuffle by floating names to their media contacts that they know will cause a premature kickback in the PLP and media. As much as they might hate Corbyn they also won't want to lose their position.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Because? I means this was 30 years ago. Or do you have an objection to miscegenation perhaps? I dunno, that amount of beard is perhaps difficult for anyone to manage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Imagine having consensual sex when you were young. Shocking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Edwina Currie and John Major is disgusting because they were old and evil.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:I've heard exactly this argument from an old guard guy. I watched Cromwell again today and reached only two conclusions: 1) Alec Guinness is a cool dude and 2) democracy is a foolish ideal for naive idiot babbies and it will never ever work as intended.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
XMNN posted:Edwina Currie and John Major is disgusting because they were old and evil. And because they were both the type to talk about how morally superior they were to not having sex outside of marriage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
'Sides, Abbott may not be too bright, but she honestly wasn't that bad-looking in the Seventies. Good on Corbyn, I say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
the tories are more disgusted by two consenting adults of difference races having sex than adults raping children.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
at least we know that Corbyn won't be claiming to be a sapiosexual anytime soon
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:And because they were both the type to talk about how morally superior they were to not having sex outside of marriage. When Major announced the Back to Basics thing, the glee with which the papers opened their safes and went to town was quite a thing to behold.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
 Welcome to Atlantis (formerly known as Yorkshire). Maybe this is somehow linked to the plans for the Northern Powerhouse?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
They're turning the entire county into a giant mill race, it's clean, renewable and has that 18th century vibe that the Tories love so much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:
Maybe they're planning on hydroelectric power or something. Lol. Right. Maybe they're planning on using the water for hydraulic fracking, or something. (This sucks, and it's happening more and more often in recent years to the surprise of no-one; I don't think we've had a winter go by without unprecedented flooding somewhere in the country. But fortunately COBRA is meeting and the military are filling sandbags  )
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:
I'm all for green energy but I draw the line at inland tidal generators. If people could stop dying in the Leeds and Liverpool canal though that would be lovely, apparently a body was pulled out yesterday morning from a stretch I often go past. Yay for the heavy rain putting me off going down there at the time of discovery 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Maybe they're planning on hydroelectric power or something. Lol. Right. Maybe they're planning on using the water for hydraulic fracking, or something. Serious point, but Hydroelectric power costs a gently caress ton in install costs, and I say this as someone who has land which is capable of having a micro hydropower station on. The screws cost a lot of their own, never mind the infrastructure needed to put them in place and get the electricity off them. If the government was really serious about this country they could pay for every hydro able piece of land to have a turbine on it and give free electricity to the land owner (within limits) and would be a drat sight cheaper than a nuclear power plant and probably produce a significant better Kw per £ yield. ukle fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Dec 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
ukle posted:Serious point, but Hydroelectric power costs a gently caress ton in install costs, and I say this as someone who has land which is capable of having a micro hydropower station on. The screws cost a lot of their own, never mind the infrastructure needed to put them in place and get the electricity off them. If the government was really serious about this country they could pay for every hydro able piece of land to have a turbine on it and give free electricity to the land owner (within limits) and would be a drat sight cheaper than a nuclear power plant and probably produce the power of 10 of them. Yes, but they're not. If they were serious about renewables they wouldn't be cutting subsidies to renewables and increasing tax breaks for oil companies and you know, fracking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
They're not serious about anything because they love having a laugh. "Oh we'll certainly see if we can do more with flood defences!" *wink to camera* Cameron's probably getting jealous of all the public militarisation going on in Belgium and saw an opportunity to get are boys in the community
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
meanwhile, elsewhere in the country: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-not-trusted-to-safeguard-national-security-by-71-of-britons-a6787776.html oh
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:COBRA is meeting Every time this comes up I'm picturing the villains from GI Joe
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:Every time this comes up I'm picturing the villains from GI Joe Unfortunately our government aren't that principled.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
David Cameron approaches a small boy on the street. Hey kid. Stop with all the downloadin'! thespaceinvader posted:Yes, but they're not. If they were serious about renewables they wouldn't be cutting subsidies to renewables and increasing tax breaks for oil companies and you know, fracking. Excuse me but renewables are a mature technology now and quite ready to stand on their own in the free market. I can't think of a good excuse for raising oil subsidies, so please just pretend that isn't happening. If there's any kind of bright side to this insanity, it's that when the remake of Final Fantasy 7 is released the plot will still be relevant 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:meanwhile, elsewhere in the country: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-not-trusted-to-safeguard-national-security-by-71-of-britons-a6787776.html Funny what constant making GBS threads on someone in the media will do, huh? Terrifying, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
It's a shame that Jeremy is seemingly utterly powerless to influence the way he is perceived by the general public. Oh well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
I mean if he scourges all life from the country it will make the nation more secure against outside threats because there won't be anything left to terrorise, and I think that's what people normally think of when it comes to national security.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:Every time this comes up I'm picturing the villains from GI Joe 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:It's a shame that Jeremy is seemingly utterly powerless to influence the way he is perceived by the general public. Oh well. based on the way the last polls turned out it seems he's winning the next election tbh
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
Renaissance Robot posted:If there's any kind of bright side to this insanity, it's that when the remake of Final Fantasy 7 is released the plot will still be relevant
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:based on the way the last polls turned out it seems he's winning the next election tbh The polls that underestimated the Tory vote share?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:The polls that underestimated the Tory vote share? Polls that expected a close victory in Oldham when it turned out to be somewhat of a landslide
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
What constituency polls of the Oldham byelection?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
a list of loyalists drawn up based on the criterion of having reliable message discipline on Trident seems unlikely to have such unity on EU ref
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
Manic_Misanthrope posted:Polls that expected a close victory in Oldham when it turned out to be somewhat of a landslide There was no polling in Oldham prior to the by election.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 03:16 |
|
|
Pissflaps posted:The polls that underestimated the Tory vote share? yes, the polls that were utterly wrong
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 01:35
|
|