test

Welcome to Talk Chelsea

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Spike

Politics & Stuff

Started by Spike,

8,587 posts in this topic

"You can act in the best interests of the country" But who's to say you know that any one party knows whats best for a country ? Surely what a majority of people want and think is better than what one person does. And plus i thought you just said you hated nanny states. Isn't denying people the right to vote pretty nannyish ?

Absolutely not. The masses are very easily manipulated by the media exploiting their religious beliefs, tribal sense of belonging, society's "moral" pressure...etc Agree with the other part though. The "best interes" is completely relative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely not. The masses are very easily manipulated by the media exploiting their religious beliefs, tribal sense of belonging, society's "moral" pressure...etc Agree with the other part though. The "best interes" is completely relative.

Yer no system is perfect but i persist in believing majority opinion is more valuable than a elite minority no matter how educated they claim to be. Obviously its better to have intelligent people running the country, but the people in this country should be consulted far more regularly when it comes to grass roots local issues in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yer no system is perfect but i persist in believing majority opinion is more valuable than a elite minority no matter how educated they claim to be. Obviously its better to have intelligent people running the country, but the people in this country should be consulted far more regularly when it comes to grass roots local issues in my opinion.

I would agree completely if we were talking about a country like the UK. Can't say the same about the middle east, unfortunately. The society here and the ideology are not at all compatible with democracy. The opinion of the majority here is dictated by a few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone watching it on BBC 2?

Just shows what incompetent fucks the BBC are. They seem to be more concerned about making the rioters sympathetic then the actual victims and how they were affected. And a lot of the rioters seem to be complete idiots, that or people who are trying to say that there actions were political as an excuses to the fact that they are opportunistic scum.

Then I realized that this program was helped by research from The Guardian and the London School of Economics, then it all made sense

dave30 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Making my blood boil.

They think about themselves and no one else. All disgusting, selfish scum. Makes me sick and ashamed to say im from England. Vile cunts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do laugh at one middle aged silly bitch who proudly claimed she supported the rioters for attacking the police, but admitted she had to fight tootth and nail to prevent them destroying her pet shop.

Idiot should realize that there is no such thing controlled chaos, if it was destroyed she got everything she deserved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very suspicious of political correctness. Its masqueraded off as a phenomenon to treat minorities fairly in terms of the spoken and written word. In practice, it seems to me, that we're entering (or are already in) a period of censorship across the West; Soviet style, where anyone who deviates from the accepted version of history/truth suffers enormous damage to their reputation and are often discredited. It also maintains the illusion of free speech and democracy.

Fulham Broadway likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta love a John Pilger article.

Good article on how the indigenous Australians are airbrushed out of olympic sport

http://www.newstates...ess-and-reveale

It's a poor article which featured more on Kumantjayi Perkins and his Freedom Rides than the real issue, which is that unless they play Aussie Rules/Rugby League or Union, Aboriginal athletes were marginalised. The statistic of 1% having the same access to training equipment etc. is utter bollocks. Unless he surveyed 1200 unemployed, countryside living, Olympic sport practising (rather than a team sport) Aboriginal athletes, there's absolutely no way that can be true, especially as Aboriginal sportsmen tend to do extremely well in the two codes of rugby and AFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a poor article which featured more on Kumantjayi Perkins and his Freedom Rides than the real issue, which is that unless they play Aussie Rules/Rugby League or Union, Aboriginal athletes were marginalised. The statistic of 1% having the same access to training equipment etc. is utter bollocks. Unless he surveyed 1200 unemployed, countryside living, Olympic sport practising (rather than a team sport) Aboriginal athletes, there's absolutely no way that can be true, especially as Aboriginal sportsmen tend to do extremely well in the two codes of rugby and AFL.

I rate Pilger -an Australian who has been writing for 50 years -pretty sure he doesnt make shit up or he would be hung out to dry.

In other news Today shocking statistic;

40% of the USA's population (around 100 million people) has less than one third of 1% of the wealth, and the top 20% of Americans owns 84%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other news Today shocking statistic;

40% of the USA's population (around 100 million people) has less than one third of 1% of the wealth, and the top 20% of Americans owns 84%.

that isnt shocking, its just sickkening. thats why Occupy Wall Street was happening. the wealthy want to keep that wealth and further exclude themselves from problems of the common-citizen and if Romney is elected thats exactly what'll happen.

capriccioso and TorontoChelsea like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rate Pilger -an Australian who has been writing for 50 years -pretty sure he doesnt make shit up or he would be hung out to dry.

Even the best can sometimes have bad days. The article itself would have been great, but the title promised something else.

In other news Today shocking statistic;

40% of the USA's population (around 100 million people) has less than one third of 1% of the wealth, and the top 20% of Americans owns 84%.

Gandhi had it right back in 1908 with the idea that we're still slaves, except instead of enslaving ourselves for subsistence, we're enslaving ourselves for consumer goods.

Fulham Broadway and dave30 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rate Pilger -an Australian who has been writing for 50 years -pretty sure he doesnt make shit up or he would be hung out to dry.

I don't rate Pilger at all as a journalist and he has been hung out to dry many times. In fact, people still use the verb "to pilger" to mean "to conduct journalism in a manner supposedly characteristic of Pilger, esp. by presenting information sensationally in support of a particular conclusion.'" (From the Independent) He is obviously incredibly slanted towards a particular worldview. Everyone has their opinions but his viewpoints are just so biased, it's hard to take what he says seriously even if what he says is accurate. I am a big critic of the US, many of its policies are short-sited, some of its actions in the "war on terror" are indefensible, and its income inequality is atrocious, but when people want to pretend that A) The US is always at fault for everything no matter what and B) That the US is no better than say Saudi Arabia or China, it's impossible to give what they say credence.The world is not just oppressors versus oppressed, it's a lot more complicated. Too many people need to see the world in good versus bad and it's rarely that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't rate Pilger at all as a journalist and he has been hung out to dry many times. In fact, people still use the verb "to pilger" to mean "to conduct journalism in a manner supposedly characteristic of Pilger, esp. by presenting information sensationally in support of a particular conclusion.'" (From the Independent) He is obviously incredibly slanted towards a particular worldview. Everyone has their opinions but his viewpoints are just so biased, it's hard to take what he says seriously even if what he says is accurate. I am a big critic of the US, many of its policies are short-sited, some of its actions in the "war on terror" are indefensible, and its income inequality is atrocious, but when people want to pretend that A) The US is always at fault for everything no matter what and B) That the US is no better than say Saudi Arabia or China, it's impossible to give what they say credence.The world is not just oppressors versus oppressed, it's a lot more complicated. Too many people need to see the world in good versus bad and it's rarely that simple.

The term 'to pilger' was invented by the right winger Auberon Waugh, aristocracy and Tory twat-so no surprises there. Basically it was invented because the corporate media could only ridicule incisive and truthful journalism that was almost a lone voice in criticising US and British neo-Colonialism, and the mass slaughter and subjugation of around 50 million people -usually brown people, round the world since WW2

Pilger isnt the messiah, but he is /has been a beacon of light in the constant shit drivel of corporate media propaganda

LDN Blue likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gandhi had it right back in 1908 with the idea that we're still slaves, except instead of enslaving ourselves for subsistence, we're enslaving ourselves for consumer goods.

Spot on the acquisition of 'things' has taken precedent over living ones life-such is the aggressive nature of capitalism -basically they want you to 'work, buy, consume, die'.

Gandhi wasnt all that though. Coming down the steps of the plane at London, when asked ''what do you think of Western Civilisation, Mr Gandhi ?'' by one of the dozens of eager reporters he replied ''i think it would be a good idea''.

Sarky cunt. Right then -give us back your degree from University of London, your barristers robes , and your 'western' glasses. lets see how you get on now . :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm half-Indian and while I like Gandhi and am grateful for everything he did for India, I don't buy into the image that's accepted worldwide, that he was some kind of saintly figure who was flawless. A Mahatma, as it were (pun intended).

Really ? Didnt know that

Yes, his main work in South Africa came from indignation that Indians were treated the same as Africans, who he felt were below Indians.

Spot on the acquisition of 'things' has taken precedent over living ones life-such is the aggressive nature of capitalism -basically they want you to 'work, buy, consume, die'.

Gandhi wasnt all that though. Coming down the steps of the plane at London, when asked ''what do you think of Western Civilisation, Mr Gandhi ?'' by one of the dozens of eager reporters he replied ''i think it would be a good idea''.

Sarky cunt. Right then -give us back your degree from University of London, your barristers robes , and your 'western' glasses. lets see how you get on now . :ph34r:

Really? Most of his work in the newspaper Hind Swaraj seems to be very critical of Western civilisation because of the capitalist turn it had taken. The reason he dressed the way he did in front of everyone, even Winston Churchill and King George V (or VI, forget which one exactly :lol:) was to show that he rejected Western theory on civilisation, which basically meant industrialised, and therefore more or less capitalist. He admired/approved of pre-capitalist Western civilisation, like the Romans and the Greeks. As far as I know he was pretty emphatic in his dislike for modern Western culture; he thought it forced decent people into degenerates because of the economic pressure heaped on everybody who wasn't a blue blood. It was purely an economic and cultural thing though, he quite liked the education system, 'equality' of Western states etc. and for a long time thought India didn't deserve to be independent until it fixed its society up to a less stratified/segregated scheme.

Gandhi was also racist.

While that's true, it doesn't take away from his achievements. It takes incredible balls for a man wearing a nothing but a loincloth to bring down the largest and most powerful empire in the history of the world, without shedding a drop of anybodies blood. It makes a nice contrast to the usual blood crazed warlords that dominated the 20th century like Hitler and Stalin. What it does take away from is the saintly image people have built up of him. He was no Mahatma, he had as many flaws as any other political figure of the early part of the 20th century, but all that gets airbrushed away.

warnie_666 and Fulham Broadway like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now