UK Politics Thread VII: Wake me DUP inside [can't wake UUP]

[Eastfield Lodge]

Given how much you believe in the superior influence of genetics over all else, why aren't you pro-Eugenics?

I made it pretty clear: the state sucks at planning things.

If the state plans car production, you end up driving a Trabant in 1989 if you were lucky enough to have been high enough up the waiting list. If the market plans car production, you can get an Audi Coupe (which is what my father, a middle income guy at the time, was driving at the time).

I want the British people to be an Audi Coupe of peoples, not a Trabant of peoples, so I oppose eugenics.

What we have at the moment, however, is not absence of eugenics, but state-backed dysgenics. Hence we are becoming Homo Trabanticus, Homo Socialismus.

State-backed dysgenic =/= state-enforced eugenics

What makes you think a state is completely unable to properly plan out a eugenics programme? Or do you believe that any form of collective control over any aspect of any societal function is inevitably disastrous?

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

I made it pretty clear: the state sucks at planning things.

If the state plans car production, you end up driving a Trabant in 1989 if you were lucky enough to have been high enough up the waiting list. If the market plans car production, you can get an Audi Coupe (which is what my father, a middle income guy at the time, was driving at the time).

I want the British people to be an Audi Coupe of peoples, not a Trabant of peoples, so I oppose eugenics.

What we have at the moment, however, is not absence of eugenics, but state-backed dysgenics. Hence we are becoming Homo Trabanticus, Homo Socialismus.

State-backed dysgenic =/= state-enforced eugenics

What makes you think a state is completely unable to properly plan out a eugenics programme? Or do you believe that any form of collective control over any aspect of any societal function is inevitably disastrous?

Pretty much.

The state is planning the population right now. More single mothers. More unemployeds. More Muslims.

Think how you would plan the population if you were playing a strategy game. Would you do this? You would have to be nuts. Socialism is nuts.

[Eastfield Lodge]

State-backed dysgenic =/= state-enforced eugenics

What makes you think a state is completely unable to properly plan out a eugenics programme? Or do you believe that any form of collective control over any aspect of any societal function is inevitably disastrous?

Pretty much.

The state is planning the population right now. More single mothers. More unemployeds. More Muslims.

Think how you would plan the population if you were playing a strategy game. Would you do this? You would have to be nuts. Socialism is nuts.

I'm talking about a more active eugenics programme than just societal welfare/immigration changes. More akin to 1930s Germany than modern day Europe.

You're saying that the state is completely incapable of accelerating Darwinian selection?

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

Pretty much.

The state is planning the population right now. More single mothers. More unemployeds. More Muslims.

Think how you would plan the population if you were playing a strategy game. Would you do this? You would have to be nuts. Socialism is nuts.

I'm talking about a more active eugenics programme than just societal welfare/immigration changes. More akin to 1930s Germany than modern day Europe.

You're saying that the state is completely incapable of accelerating Darwinian selection?

No, and it's doing it right now. Accelerating it off a cliff.

[Eastfield Lodge]

I'm talking about a more active eugenics programme than just societal welfare/immigration changes. More akin to 1930s Germany than modern day Europe.

You're saying that the state is completely incapable of accelerating Darwinian selection?

No, and it's doing it right now. Accelerating it off a cliff.

OK, but are you saying that it is impossible for the state to accelerate it in a positive way, i.e. one that would suit your tastes?

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

No, and it's doing it right now. Accelerating it off a cliff.

OK, but are you saying that it is impossible for the state to accelerate it in a positive way, i.e. one that would suit your tastes?

It's very unlikely and, if it happens, would be very unstable. It is not physically impossible.

[MERIZoC]

http://news.sky.com/story/the-allegations-in-the-westminster-harassment-dossier-11105743

Next week, Tory MP's launch "Jimmy Innocent" campaign.

[Eastfield Lodge]

OK, but are you saying that it is impossible for the state to accelerate it in a positive way, i.e. one that would suit your tastes?

It's very unlikely and, if it happens, would be very unstable. It is not physically impossible.

Right. Anyway, enough of this threadjack.

http://news.sky.com/story/the-allegations-in-the-westminster-harassment-dossier-11105743

Next week, Tory MP's launch "Jimmy Innocent" campaign.

Well, let's be honest, the chances that any prominent MPs will be destroyed is next to nothing. Might throw a couple of backbenchers under the bus to give the illusion that something's being done, but then leave it at that.

[Fartsniffage]

It's very unlikely and, if it happens, would be very unstable. It is not physically impossible.

Right. Anyway, enough of this threadjack.

http://news.sky.com/story/the-allegations-in-the-westminster-harassment-dossier-11105743

Next week, Tory MP's launch "Jimmy Innocent" campaign.

Well, let's be honest, the chances that any prominent MPs will be destroyed is next to nothing. Might throw a couple of backbenchers under the bus to give the illusion that something's being done, but then leave it at that.

Well Fallon has admitted touching a womans knee.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41812281

[Ifreann]

http://news.sky.com/story/the-allegations-in-the-westminster-harassment-dossier-11105743

Next week, Tory MP's launch "Jimmy Innocent" campaign.

:: Perpetually intoxicated and very inappropriate with women

I thought Churchill was dead

[Fartsniffage]

http://news.sky.com/story/the-allegations-in-the-westminster-harassment-dossier-11105743

Next week, Tory MP's launch "Jimmy Innocent" campaign.

:: Perpetually intoxicated and very inappropriate with women

I thought Churchill was dead

That's talking about May.

[Ifreann]

I thought Churchill was dead

That's talking about May.

I can see Brexit driving her to drink, yeah.

[Hydesland]

"Inappropriate" can mean anything, honestly, especially if your society is prudish.

[Fartsniffage]

That's talking about May.

I can see Brexit driving her to drink, yeah.

And running through a field of wheat was clearly a euphemism.

[HMS Queen Elizabeth]

"Inappropriate" can mean anything, honestly, especially if your society is prudish.

The only appropriate relationship occurs when a woman forces herself upon a man despite his token and increasingly flirtatious resistance, eventually succumbing to her dominance and charm.

After all, in Soviet Russia hamburger eat you. What we are in is way worse than Soviet Russia.

[Trumptonium]

This is one of only a handful of countries in the world where touching a woman's knee and desisting when she says no is not only highly inappropriate but front page news worthy.

Throw Fallon in jail and legalise the death penalty so we can get rid of sex offenders like this. Hung drawn and quartered, like it's supposed to be.

[Dumb Ideologies]

This is one of only a handful of countries in the world where touching a woman's knee and desisting when she says no is not only highly inappropriate but front page news worthy.

Throw Fallon in jail and legalise the death penalty so we can get rid of sex offenders like this. Hung drawn and quartered, like it's supposed to be.

That's a very patriarchal method of execution, embedded in the practices of malestream "great man" history.

Mr Fallon should face his rightful retribution through being tied to a shrine of used tampons, listening to twenty-four hours of interrupted feminist slam poetry, and finally being lit by a barrage of burning bras and torched past expiry in ritual sacrifice to the Earth Mother.

[Vassenor]

Government refuses to release details of studies into economic impact of Brexit

The Brexit department has refused to release key details about the 58 secret studies into how leaving the EU will impact the economy, saying officials need to make policy in a “safe space”.

Seema Malhotra, a Labour MP on the Brexit committee, had asked to know the scope, terms of reference and state of completion of the work on 58 sectors of the economy, but the department refused to release the details under freedom of information laws.

“There is a strong public interest in policy-making associated with our exit from the EU being of the highest quality and conducted in a safe space to allow for design and deliberation to be done in private,” the Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) said.

“In this case, releasing the commissioning document for this exercise, which is still a live policy issue, may undermine the effective formulation or development of policies which are key to our negotiating strategy.

“Disclosure would similarly set a precedent that would inhibit free and frank discussion in the future. Without the necessary safe space for unreserved instruction in commissioning briefs, the quality of the eventual advice from the respective exercise would be diminished and would in turn lead to poorer decision making.”

So there you have it. Having the facts openly available inhibits free discussion... somehow.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Government refuses to release details of studies into economic impact of Brexit

The Brexit department has refused to release key details about the 58 secret studies into how leaving the EU will impact the economy, saying officials need to make policy in a “safe space”.

Seema Malhotra, a Labour MP on the Brexit committee, had asked to know the scope, terms of reference and state of completion of the work on 58 sectors of the economy, but the department refused to release the details under freedom of information laws.

“There is a strong public interest in policy-making associated with our exit from the EU being of the highest quality and conducted in a safe space to allow for design and deliberation to be done in private,” the Department for Exiting the EU (DExEU) said.

“In this case, releasing the commissioning document for this exercise, which is still a live policy issue, may undermine the effective formulation or development of policies which are key to our negotiating strategy.

“Disclosure would similarly set a precedent that would inhibit free and frank discussion in the future. Without the necessary safe space for unreserved instruction in commissioning briefs, the quality of the eventual advice from the respective exercise would be diminished and would in turn lead to poorer decision making.”

So there you have it. Having the facts openly available inhibits free discussion... somehow.

Constant backbiting and sniping from the peanut gallery undermines the negotiating position. And that's just from the Cabinet.

Being a bit more serious for a moment (it burns!), having your situation and background data publicly available gives the other party better information about what it is that you really need from the negotiation, giving them an advantage. Think of it like poker and the other players being able to look up the details of a couple of the cards in your hand. Not quite that extreme, maybe, but you get the idea. It's not unreasonable.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Apparently progress has been made

Last time they said that the DUP came out and said nope

Alliance Party leader Naomi Long said MLAs should face a 30% pay cut if a deal to restore devolution is not done this week.

I agree with her but go further, cut all their fucking pay.

And it annoys me how all the other parties have been completely sidelined in all of this.

[Vassenor]

Apparently progress has been made

Last time they said that the DUP came out and said nope

Alliance Party leader Naomi Long said MLAs should face a 30% pay cut if a deal to restore devolution is not done this week.

I agree with her but go further, cut all their fucking pay.

And it annoys me how all the other parties have been completely sidelined in all of this.

They can't be guaranteed to vote the way the DUP wants so of course they need to be sidelined.

[Imperializt Russia]

Government refuses to release details of studies into economic impact of Brexit



So there you have it. Having the facts openly available inhibits free discussion... somehow.

Constant backbiting and sniping from the peanut gallery undermines the negotiating position. And that's just from the Cabinet.

Being a bit more serious for a moment (it burns!), having your situation and background data publicly available gives the other party better information about what it is that you really need from the negotiation, giving them an advantage. Think of it like poker and the other players being able to look up the details of a couple of the cards in your hand. Not quite that extreme, maybe, but you get the idea. It's not unreasonable.

A) this ain't poker
B) viewing this as poker and that our [shit] negotiation position would be compromised by this doesn't help the negotiation, even aside of the Tory hardline repeatedly trying to torpedo them anyway with fucking WW2 rhetoric.

C) this is important and doesn't fit precedent. Leaving the EU will - big win or colossal failure - totally redefine our relationship with the world. Given how literally divisive the issue has been, we need to know this stuff. It is fucking important.

Not to mention, the EU27 will already have assessed these industries themselves anyway, and the EU8(?) will probably be able to come to a consensus anyway, which will not be radically different from our own government's assessment.
Thus rendering A and B moot, because we're not "giving away" anything.

To use another unfitting simile, if I outwardly present as being a gay man, make jokes about being gay and how I think the other boys are cute, and my friends notice all of this, coming out to them as a gay man does not surprise anyone because they already guessed.
This does make a fitting metaphor of course, since much as I am not actually a gay man, Britain does not have a negotiating position worth giving away.

[Vassenor]

Also I'm keking at the fact the conservatives are complaining that expecting the negotiations to be transparent is taking away their safe space.

Bunch of snowflakes, the lot of them.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Also I'm keking at the fact the conservatives are complaining that expecting the negotiations to be transparent is taking away their safe space.

Bunch of snowflakes, the lot of them.

Oh do shush, Donald.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Constant backbiting and sniping from the peanut gallery undermines the negotiating position. And that's just from the Cabinet.

Being a bit more serious for a moment (it burns!), having your situation and background data publicly available gives the other party better information about what it is that you really need from the negotiation, giving them an advantage. Think of it like poker and the other players being able to look up the details of a couple of the cards in your hand. Not quite that extreme, maybe, but you get the idea. It's not unreasonable.

A) this ain't poker
B) viewing this as poker and that our [shit] negotiation position would be compromised by this doesn't help the negotiation, even aside of the Tory hardline repeatedly trying to torpedo them anyway with fucking WW2 rhetoric.

C) this is important and doesn't fit precedent. Leaving the EU will - big win or colossal failure - totally redefine our relationship with the world. Given how literally divisive the issue has been, we need to know this stuff. It is fucking important.

Not to mention, the EU27 will already have assessed these industries themselves anyway, and the EU8(?) will probably be able to come to a consensus anyway, which will not be radically different from our own government's assessment.
Thus rendering A and B moot, because we're not "giving away" anything.

To use another unfitting simile, if I outwardly present as being a gay man, make jokes about being gay and how I think the other boys are cute, and my friends notice all of this, coming out to them as a gay man does not surprise anyone because they already guessed.
This does make a fitting metaphor of course, since much as I am not actually a gay man, Britain does not have a negotiating position worth giving away.

Extreme caricatures of the situation aside, by publishing your data you're improving the quality of their information on what your situation is. They already have some information of their own, but you're unilaterally telling them more about the situation that you believe yourself to be in. Any student of game theory would tell you that this isn't a smart move.