Could you see a future government apologising for liberalisation?

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Swings and roundabouts. Societies can easily change given the right set of conditions.









Under His Eye

Praise Be

nthclare

Well knuckle draggers seem to have most of the power in this world....

People give out about alpha males and knuckle draggers...

Sure if a war broke out, I couldn't see the manginas,snowflakes and vegans protecting their kin....

It'll be left to real men who're strong, willing to be barbaric and die for the protection of their loved ones rather than run away or stand there like skittles.....

dr.fuzzenstein

nthclare wrote: »

Well knuckle draggers seem to have most of the power in this world....

People give out about alpha males and knuckle draggers...

Sure if a war broke out, I couldn't see the manginas,snowflakes and vegans protecting their kin....

It'll be left to real men who're strong, willing to be barbaric and die for the protection of their loved ones rather than run away or stand there like skittles.....

And for exactly that reason should the knuckledraggers not be in power, i.e. the "real" men who brought us 2 world wars, the cold war, Vietnam, Korea and many, many more.
There is a great yearning for the good ole' days where men went to work in the coal mine and steel factory, ate raw steaks for breakfast, lunch and dinner, drank nothing but beer and Bourbon and the wife stayed at home cooked the dinner and popped out children. Everyone lived in suburbia and everyone was white.
The only change to that was going to war.
It us not a world I would want to live in.
Today's world has a great many weirdos and eccentrics in it and a lot of diversity and I love it all.
I can only hope that this new Al Bundyism is going to die out again.

Taytoland

nthclare wrote: »

Well knuckle draggers seem to have most of the power in this world....

People give out about alpha males and knuckle draggers...

Sure if a war broke out, I couldn't see the manginas,snowflakes and vegans protecting their kin....

It'll be left to real men who're strong, willing to be barbaric and  die for the protection of their loved ones rather than run away or stand there like skittles.....

Imagine the politicians today trying to take on Adolf Hitler. They would sh*t themselves, little weaklings. Thank christ for Sir Winston Churchill.

professore

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

And for exactly that reason should the knuckledraggers not be in power, i.e. the "real" men who brought us 2 world wars, the cold war, Vietnam, Korea and many, many more.
There is a great yearning for the good ole' days where men went to work in the coal mine and steel factory, ate raw steaks for breakfast, lunch and dinner, drank nothing but beer and Bourbon and the wife stayed at home cooked the dinner and popped out children. Everyone lived in suburbia and everyone was white.
The only change to that was going to war.
It us not a world I would want to live in.
Today's world has a great many weirdos and eccentrics in it and a lot of diversity and I love it all.
I can only hope that this new Al Bundyism is going to die out again.

Ehhh you are talking about the USA there. The average Irish man would be lucky to see a steak once in their lifetime in those days. More like 12 hour days hard labour 6 days a week and a half day on Sunday. That was the working week for both my parents up to the 60s.

Yer Da sells Avon

Wibbs wrote: »

I might suggest that your use of the term CIS suggests you wouldn't even if it were happening. It suggests your down with the identity politic and that politic can be quite picky as far as which group it labels oppressed and groups outside that circle can't possibly be discriminated against. Can women be sexist? Can non Whites be racist? If you had a pause before coming up with an answer in your head, that's an answer in of itself.

I knew someone would take the bait if I threw a 'cis' into my post, but I genuinely thought it would be one of the usual fucking no-marks who all have identical posting styles and seem to spend their whole lives getting very annoyed about that kind of thing. I am very surprised it was you who mentioned it, Wibbs.

Of course non white people can be racist towards white people, and women can be sexist against men. Trouble is, they're shit at it. They don't even have any decent racial epithets or gendered slurs to throw at us. They need to up their game, tb perfectly h with you.

Wibbs wrote:

Thought experiment: your girlfriend/wife is physically abusive towards you. Who do you call? Who do you turn to? Where do you go? If you have kids and the relationship breaks down who will get near automatic custody, even if she's a proven addict/nutbag? Who gets to stay in your previously shared property?

The fathers' rights issue stems from the same mindset as the "mother's place is in the home" stuff. Those laws are wrong and unfair to fathers, but they weren't designed to keep men down - quite the opposite, in fact.

Galwayguy35

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

It looks like a shift to the right is already happening in Europe with the rise of right wing groups and parties.
Their values are mostly anti the "wrong" (brown) type of foreigner, national pride, economic isolationism, anti women (getting too many rights, should stay at home, etc...), anti Europe, well, too many antis to list.
It's a backlash from angry, white men who want the world to revolve around them and their rights, so now they want to reclaim "their" world, as in the middle ages or the 1950's.
And this new type of knuckledragger worries me.

There is a big difference between the right which is made up of people who are sick of the mess that Europe is in at the moment and far right neo nazis.

It's important to make that distinction, I'm sure it was just an oversight on your part not to highlight this in your post.

super_furry

Zebra3 wrote: »

Did anyone ever actually dance at a crossroads?

De Valeria did, but he was a weird old prick.

professore

professore wrote: »

We have built a remarkably tolerant and open society here. We can't afford to allow some groups to practice intolerance and oppression in the name of religion or culture. By all means come here in a limited and controlled fashion. But you gotta follow our rules.

Except... to enforce our rules on others is somehow wrong. Oh, I've heard all the vague reasons as to why it's wrong but it completely ignores how the rest of the world deals with migration, and multiculturalism.

The reason I say vague reasons is because it usually comes back to an ivory pedestal of higher morality, or that democracy doesn't allow such behavior.

For my own part, between leaving Europe and returning after a decade of living in Asia, in spite of all these claims of upholding freedom for migrants, the west seems far more regulated and controlled for everyone else.

Cabaal wrote: »

But you could easily argue that our society was also build with no divorce or SSM in mind either, this would be factually true as both were never foreseen as something that would happen and were against the views of the ruling church who basically dictated government policy's for decades via the likes of John Mcquaid,

You could also even extend it to contraception as well which against was against church and government policy also for decades and lots of people (and company's) fought to change it. Remember that it was May 1990 when Virgin Megastores got in trouble for selling condoms!

With respect, you can argue pretty much anything. Gender politics and gender choice is something here now, and is being embraced without any consideration to what might happen on the sidelines. People are being told to accept Transgenders and "others", without allowing people time to become comfortable with the concept... and equality laws are being brought in without considering the long-term effects. Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against Transgenders, but... I do question the rush to make everything available to them.

I understand the desire to create a equal and fair society. I've lived in societies which were the direct opposite in both Asia and the M.East. However, I do have concerns about how it's being implemented without any long-term planning or boundaries. And I do think many of these changes will come back to create real social problems in the future. I could easily be wrong. I genuinely hope I am.

Blaas4life

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Except... to enforce our rules on others is somehow wrong. Oh, I've heard all the vague reasons as to why it's wrong but it completely ignores how the rest of the world deals with migration, and multiculturalism.

The reason I say vague reasons is because it usually comes back to an ivory pedestal of higher morality, or that democracy doesn't allow such behavior.

For my own part, between leaving Europe and returning after a decade of living in Asia, in spite of all these claims of upholding freedom for migrants, the west seems far more regulated and controlled for everyone else.



With respect, you can argue pretty much anything. Gender politics and gender choice is something here now, and is being embraced without any consideration to what might happen on the sidelines. People are being told to accept Transgenders and "others", without allowing people time to become comfortable with the concept... and equality laws are being brought in without considering the long-term effects. Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against Transgenders, but... I do question the rush to make everything available to them.

I understand the desire to create a equal and fair society. I've lived in societies which were the direct opposite in both Asia and the M.East. However, I do have concerns about how it's being implemented without any long-term planning or boundaries. And I do think many of these changes will come back to create real social problems in the future. I could easily be wrong. I genuinely hope I am.

In what way/type do you envisage these social problems to arise??

Sweetemotion

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I genuinely thought it would be one of the usual fucking no-marks who all have identical posting styles and seem to spend their whole lives getting very annoyed about that kind of thing.

Blaas4life

Blaas4life wrote: »

In what way/type do you envisage these social problems to arise??

No idea.

dr.fuzzenstein

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

There is a big difference between the right which is made up of people who are sick of the mess that Europe is in at the moment and far right neo nazis.

It's important to make that distinction, I'm sure it was just an oversight on your part not to highlight this in your post.

The AfD in Germany is the perfect example of the marriage between those two.
This party tries very hard to look respectable, you will see smart suits instead of shaved heads, but it really is the same old sh*threads trying to bridge the gap between disillusioned middle class workers and skinheads patrolling the streets, bit like Gerry Adams is the smiling face behind which armed men with balaclavas are hiding.
In a way what is happening in Europe is far more worrying than the US.
In the US it seems people have lost their collective minds and have voted for a liar, conman and bully who is using middle class right wing leanings towards his own end.
Whilst in mainland Europe there is a seriously scary right wing movement developing.
The only difference between radical skinhead groups and those smiling men in suits is cosmetic.
People vote for them because they are ignorant sh*theads who don't know how fcuking good Europe has had it since 1945.
There is talk about a failed Europe, where is the fcuking failure?
They are just spoiled little pussies who wouldn't know real, true hardship because they never experienced it in their soft little lives.
They all live in a world of unprecedented well-being and civilisation and they fcuking whinge and moan about it.
The right wing voters are the real pussies and snowflakes, because they truly haven't got a clue what they have.
Well maybe they need to destroy Europe and suffer a few years of real hardship.
That'll sort out those flutes fairly lively.

Gbear

It's entirely possible we will live to regret some policies Western governments are enacting, but it won't be the liberal ones.

Liberalisation generally means individuals get to do what they want, so people don't really notice any difference to their own lives.

Weed gets legalised, you see a few extra stoners around the gaf, and you've a few new shops like offies that sell weed that spring up. Your life goes on.
Gay marriage gets legalised and you'd never know unless you're acquainted with someone who partakes.

The point of these kinds of legislation is that they make things better for a subset of individuals who are having their rights curtailed, but they don't impact on the rights of others.

The stuff that might go wrong is authoritarianism pretending to be progressivism - gender quotas, banning certain words, increasing paranoia about the content of speech in professional environments via employment legislation, and so on.

That's not a left-right thing though. We still have blasphemy enshrined in the constitution, for ****s sake. Some people are just arrogant cunts who want to make you live your life in a way that aligns to their beliefs, and they exist across the political spectrum.

Sweetemotion

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

The AfD in Germany is the perfect example of the marriage between those two.
This party tries very hard to look respectable, you will see smart suits instead of shaved heads, but it really is the same old sh*threads trying to bridge the gap between disillusioned middle class workers and skinheads patrolling the streets, bit like Gerry Adams is the smiling face behind which armed men with balaclavas are hiding.
In a way what is happening in Europe is far more worrying than the US.
In the US it seems people have lost their collective minds and have voted for a liar, conman and bully who is using middle class right wing leanings towards his own end.
Whilst in mainland Europe there is a seriously scary right wing movement developing.
The only difference between radical skinhead groups and those smiling men in suits is cosmetic.
People vote for them because they are ignorant sh*theads who don't know how fcuking good Europe has had it since 1945.
There is talk about a failed Europe, where is the fcuking failure?
They are just spoiled little pussies who wouldn't know real, true hardship because they never experienced it in their soft little lives.
They all live in a world of unprecedented well-being and civilisation and they fcuking whinge and moan about it.
The right wing voters are the real pussies and snowflakes, because they truly haven't got a clue what they have.
Well maybe they need to destroy Europe and suffer a few years of real hardship.
That'll sort out those flutes fairly lively.

Anything else to say snowflake?

dr.fuzzenstein

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Anything else to say snowflake?

Appears I have left you speechless.

Sweetemotion

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Appears I have left you speechless.

Not speechless at all just find your rants about angry white men amusing and trying to bring race into everything a bit agenda driven.

Makes me wonder if you are just another Musbot.

Hande hoche!

The Islamist/LDS/Rastafarian ruling coalition will apologise for some of our decadent ways.

Just upon reflection today - namely, listening to the This Week report on RTÉ Radio 1 today about ambulances taking a couple of hours to arrive for patients in Leitrim.

I really think of all the policies of the Irish state the one which is undermining the future most is the incredible centralisation of Ireland in Dublin. This is a very recent phenomenon - there were farms in Ranelagh as recently as 1950 - that has sped up enormously in the past 30 years (I know somebody who was able to get a mortgage for a large house in Blackrock, Dublin in the late 1980s based on the deposit they had from the profit they made on selling their house in Galway - something which would not happen now because Dublin property has stormed ahead of the whole country)

The centralisation of everything is undermining a shockingly enormous number of Irish people, not to mention communities across Ireland. The obvious one is property prices and how it's putting families in more debt to property than ever in our history, and how two parents must work now to pay it - something which would not be as necessary if the jobs and housing were spread more evenly across Ireland. The Dublin-centric policies of the state are, ironically now, hugely undermining the city's competitiveness as firms are struggling to attract employees to pay Dublin rents and accept frequently poor accommodation. And Dublin's infrastructure is only going to become less capable of holding the increasing population.

With willpower the state could use modern communications and technology to spread the resources and economy of the state more broadly and stop this self-inflicted pent-up everything that is Dublin. There's no reason why they could not set up the right tax system and supports to attract corporations and workers to urban centres across this very small country. The current policy is only going to lead to vast swathes of Ireland being all but abandoned and the wealth, infrastructure and social services of the state deeply out of kilter. A complete waste of our natural resources when so much of the country is left idle.

FunLover18

super_furry wrote: »

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Made to feel embarrassed and ashamed for simply being born a cis white male.

Told your masculine nature is toxic.

Outside of interernet hyperbole, where does this happen? I’ve never met anyone who would hold such views, don’t know anyone in my circle who gets so wrapped up in identity politics on either scale and certainly have never been “Made to feel embarrassed and ashamed for simply being born a cis white male”.

Extreme and exaggerated online views are not reflective of wider Irish society.

The only people who make me feel ashamed to be born a cis white male are other cis white males who whine and moan that their childhood is being raped or that they're somehow victims of liberal society.

nthclare

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

And for exactly that reason should the knuckledraggers not be in power, i.e. the "real" men who brought us 2 world wars, the cold war, Vietnam, Korea and many, many more.
There is a great yearning for the good ole' days where men went to work in the coal mine and steel factory, ate raw steaks for breakfast, lunch and dinner, drank nothing but beer and Bourbon and the wife stayed at home cooked the dinner and popped out children. Everyone lived in suburbia and everyone was white.
The only change to that was going to war.
It us not a world I would want to live in.
Today's world has a great many weirdos and eccentrics in it and a lot of diversity and I love it all.
I can only hope that this new Al Bundyism is going to die out again.

No matter what it'll always be the alpha male who'll get on in society and hold sway...

Some people won't like it, it's the way nature works.

Most women I know who married liberal soft men and split up with mr yes usually go for the alpha afterwards.....

Look I'd love if we all lived in a Utopian happy go lucky society but there's always going to be mad loons in a group setting.

Sweetemotion

FunLover18 wrote: »

The only people who make me feel ashamed to be born a cis white male are other cis white males who whine and moan that their childhood is being raped or that they're somehow victims of liberal society.

Aren't you just great, really great well done you way to go.

Ubbquittious

nthclare wrote: »

No matter what it'll always be the alpha male who'll get on in society and hold sway...

Some people won't like it, it's the way nature works.

Most women I know who married liberal soft men and split up with mr yes usually go for the alpha afterwards.....

Look I'd love if we all lived in a Utopian happy go lucky society but there's always going to be mad loons in a group setting.

I have met Mr. yes and he's a bit of an eejit. An innocent auld fool of a fella. No reasonable level headed person I talk to disagrees, yet 'society' these days is trying its hardest to make his eejity traits the norm. What in the feck is going on?

It's like everyone you meet telling you they hate Fianna Gael and they still being reelected.

nthclare

Ubbquittious wrote: »

I have met Mr. yes and he's a bit of an eejit. An innocent auld fool of a fella. No reasonable level headed person I talk to disagrees, yet 'society' these days is trying its hardest to make his eejity traits the norm. What in the feck is going on?

It's like everyone you meet telling you they hate Fianna Gael and they still being reelected.

Yes I know, sure everyone needs to be loved...

You're right there about society trying to make certain things the norm...

Dumb us all down and we'll all have to be absolutely PC and not offend anyone or get annoyed with the system....

Because when we're subdued we can be controlled...

Fck that, if people just wake up and be themselves then it'll be easier lol

animaal

To give my opinion on the OP's question -
Apologise? No, that implies accountability, and our governments don't do accountability.

I do worry that some of our current race towards liberalism will have negative results. I'd be conservative in the sense that I'm risk-averse. Gay marriage, abortion, divorce? Sure, why not. If these things do wind up having some sort of an unexpected serious down side, we can alter/reverse any policies in those areas.
Immigration is different in that it can't be reversed. We can turn off the tap, but we can't undo it. For that reason, I'd much prefer that changes of public policy in the area be very slow, with continual analysis of the results, lessons learned, and corrections made as we go. I don't think that immigration itself is necessarily a bad thing, but the way we're doing it is like playing Russian Roulette. It may all turn out grand regardless, but why not take more care in how we manage it?

dr.fuzzenstein

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Not speechless at all just find your rants about angry white men amusing and trying to bring race into everything a bit agenda driven.

Makes me wonder if you are just another Musbot.

Going by your post history I got your number. I didn't post at you, it's just what I belive. Peace and love and all that.
Musbot? Love it, must remember that. Check out my sig.

brevity

It's all the internet's fault.

These identity politics types are all confused because they keep talking to like minded people. All stuck in a bubble. No real idea of how rational people communicate.

Get off YouTube and Twitter for a bit and live your life instead of giving out about nonsense that doesn't affect you if don't let it.

kunst nugget

brevity wrote: »

It's all the internet's fault.

These identity politics types are all confused because they keep talking to like minded people. All stuck in a bubble. No real idea of how rational people communicate.

Get off YouTube and Twitter for a bit and live your life instead of giving out about nonsense that doesn't affect you if don't let it.

Exact same thing goes for all those right wing types.

brevity

kunst nugget wrote: »

Exact same thing goes for all those right wing types.

They are the exact same. Lonely, angry confused people.

Mutant z

Its the toxic so called liberalisation i cant stand that you must support multiculturalism, militant feminism, gender neutral, trans, identity politics etc which is anything bit liberal strangely enough its one of the great liberal things that is freedom of speech thats being sacrificed at the alter in the name of so called progression i believe in real liberal values not this identity politics nonsense hiding behind the mask of liberalism and tolerance when its anything but.

Grayson

Gbear wrote: »

It's entirely possible we will live to regret some policies Western governments are enacting, but it won't be the liberal ones.

Liberalisation generally means individuals get to do what they want, so people don't really notice any difference to their own lives.

Weed gets legalised, you see a few extra stoners around the gaf, and you've a few new shops like offies that sell weed that spring up. Your life goes on.
Gay marriage gets legalised and you'd never know unless you're acquainted with someone who partakes.

The point of these kinds of legislation is that they make things better for a subset of individuals who are having their rights curtailed, but they don't impact on the rights of others.

The stuff that might go wrong is authoritarianism pretending to be progressivism - gender quotas, banning certain words, increasing paranoia about the content of speech in professional environments via employment legislation, and so on.

That's not a left-right thing though. We still have blasphemy enshrined in the constitution, for ****s sake. Some people are just arrogant cunts who want to make you live your life in a way that aligns to their beliefs, and they exist across the political spectrum.

Yep. I've mentioned it many times before but our society works on a rules based utilitarianism. We generally let people have as much freedom as possible whilst not letting it impact others negatively. Having two people of teh same sex marry doesn't affect anyone else really. Same with weed etc.

We have certain rules because in true utiltarianism it could be argued that killing someone for money is ok if the money is used for good. So we have some basic principles like don't kill etc.

The clash between right and left occurs when the right want to retain one of those rules that's become outdated. Previously we had rules that involved sexual freedoms for example. That's why we ended up in a situation where married women couldn't work in the civil service and no-one could get divorced. For some people they wanted to retain those rules because of religious reasons, others genuinely thought it would destroy society if we got rid of them. They thought if we allowed divorce we'd get to a point where no-one would stay married for longer than it took to find someone else to shag. And that working women would destroy the family.

But now the majority of people have come to realize that allowing someone to divorce doesn't affect anyone except the people involved. We realize that families exist in all shapes and sizes and we can't regulate what it should look like.

It's always been the way that people moralise and claim that some change will destroy society. Time and time again they've been proven wrong.

Franz Von Peppercorn

FunLover18 wrote: »

The only people who make me feel ashamed to be born a cis white male are other cis white males who whine and moan that their childhood is being raped or that they're somehow victims of liberal society.

You’ve really inhaled the kool aid.

White privilege is meaningless Americanised garbage. Your ancestors were historically oppressed by the British, some of whom no doubt cross dressed, some of whom were gay and many of whom were female. Thatcher for instance. Queen Elizabeth.

Franz Von Peppercorn

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

And for exactly that reason should the knuckledraggers not be in power, i.e. the "real" men who brought us 2 world wars, the cold war, Vietnam, Korea and many, many more.
There is a great yearning for the good ole' days where men went to work in the coal mine and steel factory, ate raw steaks for breakfast, lunch and dinner, drank nothing but beer and Bourbon and the wife stayed at home cooked the dinner and popped out children. Everyone lived in suburbia and everyone was white.
The only change to that was going to war.
It us not a world I would want to live in.
Today's world has a great many weirdos and eccentrics in it and a lot of diversity and I love it all.
I can only hope that this new Al Bundyism is going to die out again.

People lived in surburbia after WWII, not before. In general.

There are plenty of wars going on at the moment, Syria, Yemen etc. I don’t see much on the rise of diversity in the US stopping that. Unless Nikki Haley is a white male in disguise.

As I recall you suppport the US in Syria.

Grayson

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

People lived in surburbia after WWII, not before. In general.

There are plenty of wars going on at the moment, Syria, Yemen etc. I don’t see much on the rise of diversity in the US stopping that. Unless Nikki Haley is a white male in disguise.

As I recall you suppport the US in Syria.

There's still less wars now that there were historically. And europe has pretty much been at peace since world war 2 (with the exception of some ethnic cleansing in the balkans).

btw, the US has the least amount of social mobility in the western world. It also has the greatest amount of poverty. And since you mention Nikki Haley, Trump has appointed far less women than Obama did.

https://www.glamour.com/story/gop-tweeted-trump-set-record-for-appointing-women-senior-positions

If you look at mid-level positions, Trump's track record isn't much better: An October analysis by Reuters found that his "broader bureaucracy" was comprised of largely white and male members (82 percent white, 60 percent male).

Franz Von Peppercorn

Grayson wrote: »

There's still less wars now that there were historically. And europe has pretty much been at peace since world war 2 (with the exception of some ethnic cleansing in the balkans).

Fewer. However the destabilisation of the Middle East is pretty extreme. And Libya. It’s that destabilisation which is fuelling the right in Europe. Hungary has a history of oppression under Islamic rule for instance, so it’s understandable that mass migration of muslims isn’t going to be popular, nor that the rise of a right wing Turkish nationalist isn’t going to lead to a reaction in Hungary. Poland has its own history too. Very little of this is driven by twitter wars. Italy has a major crisis on two fronts - a stagnating economy (contrasting to the decades of growth pre Euro) and the refugee crisis, caused by US, French and UK beligerance in Libya, and EU rules on migration.

For Dr Fuzzenstein it’s the best of all possible worlds though.

Most of the right wing increases have nothing to do with twitter wars. It’s responses to facts on the ground.

btw, the US has the least amount of social mobility in the western world. It also has the greatest amount of poverty. And since you mention Nikki Haley, Trump has appointed far less women than Obama did.

https://www.glamour.com/story/gop-tweeted-trump-set-record-for-appointing-women-senior-positions

Did you think I was defending the US?

Taytoland

Grayson wrote: »

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

People lived in surburbia after WWII, not before. In general.

There are plenty of wars going on at the moment, Syria, Yemen etc. I don’t see much on the rise of diversity in the US stopping that. Unless Nikki Haley is a white male in disguise.

As I recall you suppport the US in Syria.

There's still less wars now that there were historically. And europe has pretty much been at peace since world war 2 (with the exception of some ethnic cleansing in the balkans).

btw, the US has the least amount of social mobility in the western world. It also has the greatest amount of poverty. And since you mention Nikki Haley, Trump has appointed far less women than Obama did.

https://www.glamour.com/story/gop-tweeted-trump-set-record-for-appointing-women-senior-positions

If you look at mid-level positions, Trump's track record isn't much better: An October analysis by Reuters found that his "broader bureaucracy" was comprised of largely white and male members (82 percent white, 60 percent male).

What difference does it make when they just transport the wars to a different arena, ie the Middle East and in particular the Iraq War which most of us know was fought on lies by Bush and Blair.

dr.fuzzenstein

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Most of the right wing increases have nothing to do with twitter wars. It’s responses to facts on the ground.

Let's just take that statement.
It is popular to make a lot of waves about Europe under Siege, Muslim Rape Gangs, Sharia Patrols, No Go Areas, Hoardes of Suicide Bombers roaming the Streets in Europe, nowhere is safe, crisis, civil war, panic, panic, etc.
The reality is that I do see a few more darker skinned people about the place, even in my tiny village. And that's it.
The "Evil Mussies" Agenda gets pushed very hard and vehemently by the usual Twitter and Facebook Bots. It's a lot like Hillary Clinton, while she ran for Pres there was an unbelievable avalanche of posts saying she should be in jail, she's terminally ill, basically saying she's a monster.
All of it hype, all of it false and bullsh*t.
Yes, there is a concerted campaign via social media to whip up a frenzy of nationalist sentiment.
I find it very sad that all this brown sediment has been lying around since WW2, just waiting for a time when it would become socially acceptable to show national pride an then they could slip the more extreme stuff in with it.

dr.fuzzenstein

Taytoland wrote: »

What difference does it make when they just transport the wars to a different arena, ie the Middle East and in particular the Iraq War which most of us know was fought on lies by Bush and Blair.

That I would agree with. What we learnt from 2 word wars is that you never sh*t on your own doorstep.
You find some unimportant sh*thole country and you sh*t on them.
IMO Bush and Blair should be tried as war criminals.

kunst nugget

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Let's just take that statement.
It is popular to make a lot of waves about Europe under Siege, Muslim Rape Gangs, Sharia Patrols, No Go Areas, Hoardes of Suicide Bombers roaming the Streets in Europe, nowhere is safe, crisis, civil war, panic, panic, etc.
The reality is that I do see a few more darker skinned people about the place, even in my tiny village. And that's it.
The "Evil Mussies" Agenda gets pushed very hard and vehemently by the usual Twitter and Facebook Bots. It's a lot like Hillary Clinton, while she ran for Pres there was an unbelievable avalanche of posts saying she should be in jail, she's terminally ill, basically saying she's a monster.
All of it hype, all of it false and bullsh*t.
Yes, there is a concerted campaign via social media to whip up a frenzy of nationalist sentiment.
I find it very sad that all this brown sediment has been lying around since WW2, just waiting for a time when it would become socially acceptable to show national pride an then they could slip the more extreme stuff in with it.

Tbf, we're not on the coalface here so we are talking about what's happening in Europe from a remove without being in any meaningful way affected by the issues that they are. I don't the far right gaining popularity is down to Twitter campaigns or facebook bots.

topper75

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Angela loves the extra staff to bang out the BMW's.

Robots. They are made with robots chiefly.

James Brown

I think thanks to the church, the people who used religion to bend the public to their will, including politicians, we will likely never see a return. We could get more conservative, but only under the fake 'conservative' label as peddled by private interest to stuff their pockets, (business first and last / trickle down myth).
Using conservatism/nationalism would be a tough one for the likes of Fine Gael. How do you spin nationalism for economic purposes without getting involved with nationalism? Unlike Italy and the U.S. we are a dived country. maybe after a united Ireland takes the republican out of the frame.
In short, we will only go backwards if there's money to be made privately using it as a deflection, (see Trump).

kunst nugget

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I think thanks to the church, the people who used religion to bend the public to their will, including politicians, we will likely never see a return. We could get more conservative, but only under the fake 'conservative' label as peddled by private interest to stuff their pockets, (business first and last / trickle down myth).
Using conservatism/nationalism would be a tough one for the likes of Fine Gael. How do you spin nationalism for economic purposes without getting involved with nationalism? Unlike Italy and the U.S. we are a dived country. maybe after a united Ireland takes the republican out of the frame.
In short, we will only go backwards if there's money to be made using it as a deflection.

The thing is that Republicanism, which is the most apparent expression of nationalism in this country, actually morphed into a far-left movement which is at odds with how nationalism generally expresses itself on the continent or even with our neighbours, England. While most of the people who supported the RA I suspect didn't give two shítes about the far left, it means that our flag or national symbols didn't get tainted with the whiff of the far right in the way England's flag has. It's an oddity that for such a conservative country, we've never really had an expressly far-right party that had any traction beyond the Blueshirts original few moments in the sun back in the thirties.

Grayson

kunst nugget wrote: »

Tbf, we're not on the coalface here so we are talking about what's happening in Europe from a remove without being in any meaningful way affected by the issues that they are. I don't the far right gaining popularity is down to Twitter campaigns or facebook bots.

It is partly.

there's a large group of people for whom facebook is their major source of news. Up until recently that news wasn't vetted. And it was presented as fact.

Now it's not bots but it is humans acting like robots. People see something, it generates an emotional reaction and they like and share it. If they've seen crap like this beforehand and clicked like, then they're even more likely to see it.

People like us who post on threads like this are generally more informed. We have an active interest in the news. It's a hobby almost. We have multiple sources and we tend to be able to filter out the dodgy stories.

All russia did was figure out how to weaponise it. They were able to target swing voters in particular areas with particular messages.


Years ago a site I belonged to that was very like boards, p45rant.net decided to create an urban legend. This was in the days before facebook. So the story was written up and we all mailed it to people we knew. It spread and the next day it was in the Mirror with details we hadn't created. It was covered by the mirror, the sun, the star and the indo. It was also on fox news. It was about irish siblings, in the US on a J1, who had been arrested for speaking Irish at a 4th of July parade. It took a week before anyone figured out it was bollox.
We followed it up with a story about Berlusconi demanding the caravaggios from the national gallery. The quote was "Potato eaters give us back our art". There were others too. Complete bollox but people believed them.

To summarise, people are idiots. They'll believe anything that sounds plausible. And Facebook just presents these people with a steady stream of bullsh1t that they'll readily believe. All they need is a news story and a smidge of a bias and that's it. And that goes for people of any political persuasion.

Studies have shown that the people who are most anti immigration are the ones least impacted by it. They have no experience of it so they generate information from what they hear. And if what they hear is from sources like facebook, they'll be more likely to form negative opinions.

Grayson

Grayson wrote: »

To summarise, people are idiots. They'll believe anything that sounds plausible. And Facebook just presents these people with a steady stream of bullsh1t that they'll readily believe. All they need is a news story and a smidge of a bias and that's it. And that goes for people of any political persuasion.

The same can be said for any media outlet, and western media has dropped all it's standards since the 70s. I was shocked at the quality of the news when I returned to Ireland last year, compared to when I left a decade previously. I'd always known RTE to be a mouthpiece of the government, but the layers of BS presented is simply incredible. I'd always known the US to be subject to these kinds of media biases but I was amazed that Ireland and other European countries had followed suit. And to put in context, I've lived mostly in China where propaganda and "approved" news stories are the norm.

Studies have shown that the people who are most anti immigration are the ones least impacted by it. They have no experience of it so they generate information from what they hear. And if what they hear is from sources like facebook, they'll be more likely to form negative opinions.

I do wonder about these kind of studies. You see, I've lived abroad.. and these kind of studies have been raised in conversations among the expats. None of us have ever been a participant to one of these studies or known anyone who was.

While, I'm not anti-immigration, I am very pro-controlled immigration, and placing restrictions on migrants similar to what other non-western nations do. Most expats I know feel similar. But then we've lived in Asia, M.East and traveled through parts of Africa. TBH I suspect most of the people who are so pro-immigration are the ones with the least personal experience of other cultures outside of their own. They haven't seen the culture firsthand except as part of a tourist package, haven't seen the state of the countries in question, and seem to believe that those migrating to Europe are somehow more enlightened than those left behind. That might have been true when migration was more voluntary but with the economic and civil issues sweeping most countries, Europe is getting more people who don't really like Western cultures.

But hey, the media is sympathetic to their ordeals, so it's easier to justify.

Franz Von Peppercorn

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

That I would agree with. What we learnt from 2 word wars is that you never sh*t on your own doorstep.
You find some unimportant sh*thole country and you sh*t on them.
IMO Bush and Blair should be tried as war criminals.

Not Obama? Research drones. Research Libya. (Although there was more than simple presidential responsibility there). Syria was also on his watch.