UK Politics Thread: The Mandelson Effect

[Magna-Parva]

Oh, come off it. People are people. Humans are humans. We are diverse, but it is a gradient of diversity, which is why attempts to draw clear boundaries always fail and why prejudice is so ludicrous. People are similar – not the same – and all people deserve human rights. I don't know why this isn't obvious to you.

I never said people dont deserve human rights thats quite a stretch of what I am even saying in the first place.
We should help people who are in need and we do that often.
But when it comes to people of different cultures coming to your country its important that integration and mixing is orderly otherwise you just end up with racial tentions and cultural ghettos.
Especially if said cultures have conflicting views on the role of women in society for example.

Let's go back to the bit where you said "assuming people are the same as you based on the fact everyone is human is a dangerous idea". Possibly you'd like to rephrase?

[Greater Britannian Realm]

The actions and views of cultures that see women as second class citizens or even worse as property show otherwise.
Allowing cultures that have such misogynistic views is why misogyny is on the rise.
Its why education and integration is important.

You mean like Andrew Tate, who has done more to promote that sort of BS?
Religions have done this, yes, but that's all religions, including the very Christianity at home.

What has promoted this nonsense is the manosphere BS.

Sure Andrew tate is his own brand of utter rubbish.
But we need to combat both sources.
We cant give any leeway to the other side.

[Humanlonia]

I don't deny the need for education, and for those who want to become British, integration is essential. But don't forget that most cultures, including the British, have a certain amount of misogyny, and you seem to view refugees as second-class citizens, which also says a lot about British culture. Don't get me wrong, I really like British culture, but I'm just saying that all humanity and every culture has a certain amount of barbarism.

There's also this weird tendency to tar all Muslims with the same brush. Just because some Muslims are, not to put too fine a point on it, total nutjobs, certainly does not mean that all Muslims are (a) mysognistic and (b) violent. I would have thought this was elementary reasoning, but apparently it needs to be pointed out to people who missed the last 60 years of human history.

Yes, that would be the same as if he said that Putin persecutes homosexuals and transgender people, meaning that Russian culture inherently hates them. This ignores individual views and the complexity of cultures.

[Magna-Parva]

There's also this weird tendency to tar all Muslims with the same brush. Just because some Muslims are, not to put too fine a point on it, total nutjobs, certainly does not mean that all Muslims are (a) mysognistic and (b) violent. I would have thought this was elementary reasoning, but apparently it needs to be pointed out to people who missed the last 60 years of human history.

Yes, that would be the same as if he said that Putin persecutes homosexuals and transgender people, meaning that Russian culture inherently hates them. This ignores individual views and the complexity of cultures.

To be fair, Russia has been a Psychotic Dictatorship long enough that to an extent there is a cultural repression of gay and trans people. But that most certainly doesn't mean that Russian people are by default bigots.

[Celritannia]

You mean like Andrew Tate, who has done more to promote that sort of BS?
Religions have done this, yes, but that's all religions, including the very Christianity at home.

What has promoted this nonsense is the manosphere BS.

Sure Andrew tate is his own brand of utter rubbish.
But we need to combat both sources.
We cant give any leeway to the other side.

I agree, but that does not mean to say the cultures and religions of refugees are the major issue.

Studies show that far-right misogyny is a significant factor in the rise of anti-woman and gender dividing issues.

[Greater Britannian Realm]

I never said people dont deserve human rights thats quite a stretch of what I am even saying in the first place.
We should help people who are in need and we do that often.
But when it comes to people of different cultures coming to your country its important that integration and mixing is orderly otherwise you just end up with racial tentions and cultural ghettos.
Especially if said cultures have conflicting views on the role of women in society for example.

Let's go back to the bit where you said "assuming people are the same as you based on the fact everyone is human is a dangerous idea". Possibly you'd like to rephrase?

Assuming people are the same because everyone is human,
Meaning assuming different cultures and people are not different from you and instead just share all of your ideas and views of the world.
There is quite a few people often on the left that fall into this trap.
They assume the world is a kind place and all we need to do is share love and friendship.

When that outlook has lead to some rather sad deaths when they have gone on holiday to extremly dangerous areas thinking if they just show respect for multicultural values they will be perfectly fine.

[Celritannia]

Let's go back to the bit where you said "assuming people are the same as you based on the fact everyone is human is a dangerous idea". Possibly you'd like to rephrase?

Assuming people are the same because everyone is human,
Meaning assuming different cultures and people are not different from you and instead just share all of your ideas and views of the world.
There is quite a few people often on the left that fall into this trap.
They assume the world is a kind place and all we need to do is share love and friendship.

When that outlook has lead to some rather sad deaths when they have gone on holiday to extremly dangerous areas thinking if they just show respect for multicultural values they will be perfectly fine.

This whole post is general speculation with no substance.

[Greater Britannian Realm]

Assuming people are the same because everyone is human,
Meaning assuming different cultures and people are not different from you and instead just share all of your ideas and views of the world.
There is quite a few people often on the left that fall into this trap.
They assume the world is a kind place and all we need to do is share love and friendship.

When that outlook has lead to some rather sad deaths when they have gone on holiday to extremly dangerous areas thinking if they just show respect for multicultural values they will be perfectly fine.

This whole post is general speculation with no substance.

Its philosophy type things.
The truth of human nature and how culture changes things etc.
So yeah its going to be speculation and hardly any substance.
Some people think humanity can unite as a collective some people dont think thats possible.

[Ostroeuropa]

I never said people dont deserve human rights thats quite a stretch of what I am even saying in the first place.
We should help people who are in need and we do that often.
But when it comes to people of different cultures coming to your country its important that integration and mixing is orderly otherwise you just end up with racial tentions and cultural ghettos.
Especially if said cultures have conflicting views on the role of women in society for example.

Let's go back to the bit where you said "assuming people are the same as you based on the fact everyone is human is a dangerous idea". Possibly you'd like to rephrase?

This is why the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan failed. The lessons of that war from the far-left are "Don't invade countries". For the rest of us it's that human universalism, and its offspring of multiculturalism, are based upon a factual error. Not every culture is capable of having a western political system, and likewise, not every culture has people able to participate in a western society.

Yes, that would be the same as if he said that Putin persecutes homosexuals and transgender people, meaning that Russian culture inherently hates them. This ignores individual views and the complexity of cultures.

To be fair, Russia has been a Psychotic Dictatorship long enough that to an extent there is a cultural repression of gay and trans people. But that most certainly doesn't mean that Russian people are by default bigots.

On the whole someone who comes from a society that doesn't teach people to read, will not be able to cope in our society. Some small fraction of the exceptional may adapt. While exceptions exist, bureaucracy cannot function upon outliers. It is not a statement of actual reality, but political and bureaucratic reality. In much the same way as we set any standard, like drink driving laws. On the whole there exist foreign people who are not going to contribute to our society positively and should not be here, to deny that is to devolve into the absurd. The point of contention is that the left insists on governance by exception due to their obsession with liberal individualism in this one specific area, as opposed to a more practical form of governance.

I am not willing to tolerate a great mass of burdensome individuals just to avoid "Unfairly" prosecuting someone for drink driving who "Could totally handle it, you're just being prejudiced".

They come from backward cultures. We have no interest in them being here. If they are an exception worth taking seriously, they can prove that abroad. Appeals to the exception mean basically nothing and yet it's what the entire counterargument relies on, and is not a seriously held anarcho-individualist principle that the multiculturalists hold. They're more than willing to dismiss out of hand as deranged and childish its application in other areas (Such as drink driving regulation). It is adopted purely because they have been maneuverered into such by an array of anti-western forces engaged in subversion.

Afghani culture is poisonous to several values we hold dear. An Afghan is effectively akin to a drunk in terms of competence on those issues. I do not trust them around women in the same way you wouldn't trust me to drive you home after four beers, no matter how much I prattle at you about you prejudging the situation and while many such people as drunk as I would crash, you are unfairly assuming I will do the same.

This is the reality of the situation. But it is a reality that the left is in tension with and cannot acknowledge. To be submerged in such a culture has effects. Only the exceptional will rise above it, and the exception is no basis of common practice.

[Celritannia]

This whole post is general speculation with no substance.

Its philosophy type things.
The truth of human nature and how culture changes things etc.
So yeah its going to be speculation and hardly any substance.
Some people think humanity can unite as a collective some people dont think thats possible.

Good job, no one has at any point mentioned this in the debate, so you are bringing something up that is not relevant.

[Greater Britannian Realm]

Its philosophy type things.
The truth of human nature and how culture changes things etc.
So yeah its going to be speculation and hardly any substance.
Some people think humanity can unite as a collective some people dont think thats possible.

Good job, no one has at any point mentioned this in the debate, so you are bringing something up that is not relevant.

Roger the jammie dodger.
Ill try not to speak into the void next time.

[Magna-Parva]

Let's go back to the bit where you said "assuming people are the same as you based on the fact everyone is human is a dangerous idea". Possibly you'd like to rephrase?

This is why the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan failed. The lessons of that war from the far-left are "Don't invade countries". For the rest of us it's that human universalism, and its offspring of multiculturalism, are based upon a factual error. Not every culture is capable of having a western political system, and likewise, not every culture has people able to participate in a western society.

That's the most patronizing BS I've ever heard. Let's pat the Arabs on the head, they're not smart enough to have a democracy. It's definitely that, and not because the U.S. kept invading them.
Uruguay, Brazil, and Chile all had military dictatorships in the 20th century and are now all mostly stable democracies, with Uruguay being among the most democratic in the Americas (after Costa Rica only, in some rankings).
Japan had autocratic and militaristic rule for decades, but is now a full, if somewhat idiosyncratic, democracy.
Taiwan operates a successful democracy, while their neighbours the Chinese are still autocratic.
India operates a partial democracy, and would do far better if Narendra "not a Hindu nationalist at all" Modi weren't in power.
The claim that some cultures "just aren't suited to democracy" is straight-out racism.

[Ostroeuropa]

This is why the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan failed. The lessons of that war from the far-left are "Don't invade countries". For the rest of us it's that human universalism, and its offspring of multiculturalism, are based upon a factual error. Not every culture is capable of having a western political system, and likewise, not every culture has people able to participate in a western society.

That's the most patronizing BS I've ever heard. Let's pat the Arabs on the head, they're not smart enough to have a democracy. It's definitely that, and not because the U.S. kept invading them.
Uruguay, Brazil, and Chile all had military dictatorships in the 20th century and are now all mostly stable democracies, with Uruguay being among the most democratic in the Americas (after Costa Rica only, in some rankings).
Japan had autocratic and militaristic rule for decades, but is now a full, if somewhat idiosyncratic, democracy.
Taiwan operates a successful democracy, while their neighbours the Chinese are still autocratic.
The claim that some cultures "just aren't suited to democracy" is straight-out racism.

It's not about them being smart. That's ironically western chauvinism. It's about them being different. No better or worse, but incompatible. And no, it's not that the US kept invading them, they do not have the appropriate social or political culture for a western governmental system.

The examples you list are examples of political cultures and systems which proved able to establish democratic norms and civil societies. Why would the US invading Iraq and Afghanistan cause the downfall of subsequent democratic governments made on their behalf exactly? Show me the reasoning rather than just blaming the west on impulse.

For that matter, of those you listed, most were westernized military dictatorship systems (Including Japan). Even the west has multiple modes of government available to it.

And yet attempting to impose say a clan based dictatorship system on say, Brazil, would collapse immediately. Guess why. Brazil is suited to western forms of government. Democracy is only one of those.

The middle east is not. The attempt to impose democracy on Iraq was as doomed as attempting to establish a Junta would have been.

[Greater Britannian Realm]

This is why the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan failed. The lessons of that war from the far-left are "Don't invade countries". For the rest of us it's that human universalism, and its offspring of multiculturalism, are based upon a factual error. Not every culture is capable of having a western political system, and likewise, not every culture has people able to participate in a western society.

That's the most patronizing BS I've ever heard. Let's pat the Arabs on the head, they're not smart enough to have a democracy. It's definitely that, and not because the U.S. kept invading them.
Uruguay, Brazil, and Chile all had military dictatorships in the 20th century and are now all mostly stable democracies, with Uruguay being among the most democratic in the Americas (after Costa Rica only, in some rankings).
Japan had autocratic and militaristic rule for decades, but is now a full, if somewhat idiosyncratic, democracy.
Taiwan operates a successful democracy, while their neighbours the Chinese are still autocratic.
India operates a partial democracy, and would do far better if Narendra "not a Hindu nationalist at all" Modi weren't in power.
The claim that some cultures "just aren't suited to democracy" is straight-out racism.

I would like to point out Japan had a flourishing democracy set up by their own efforts.
Though sadly this collapsed and the military began to bully the weak japanese government.
Mostly due to the great depression and the increasing power of the japanese military.
Taishō Democracy

[Kerwa]

The actions and views of cultures that see women as second class citizens or even worse as property show otherwise.
Allowing cultures that have such misogynistic views is why misogyny is on the rise.
Its why education and integration is important.

You mean like Andrew Tate, who has done more to promote that sort of BS?
Religions have done this, yes, but that's all religions, including the very Christianity at home.

What has promoted this nonsense is the manosphere BS.

The dangers of far-right misogyny are much more prevalent and should be tackled as an immediate threat. This would also include better education for those coming from different cultures and religions.

Lol. A leader of a Labour council described the victims of grooming gangs as “white trash” only just this summer. Instead of making up lurid rape fantasies about right wing misogyny - which apparently involve a lot of working class people - maybe it is time to audit the attitudes of the right thinking middle classes. After all, they are the ones running things, and are therefore ultimately responsible.

I’ll go further and add that the attitude of people from private schools towards this sort if thing is well known. You are shooting at imaginary targets, because the establishment is too cowardly to actually tackle the real issues.

[Celritannia]

You mean like Andrew Tate, who has done more to promote that sort of BS?
Religions have done this, yes, but that's all religions, including the very Christianity at home.

What has promoted this nonsense is the manosphere BS.

The dangers of far-right misogyny are much more prevalent and should be tackled as an immediate threat. This would also include better education for those coming from different cultures and religions.

Lol. A leader of a Labour council described the victims of grooming gangs as “white trash” only just this summer. Instead of making up lurid rape fantasies about right wing misogyny - which apparently involve a lot of working class people - maybe it is time to audit the attitudes of the right thinking middle classes. After all, they are the ones running things, and are therefore ultimately responsible.

I’ll go further and add that the attitude of people from private schools towards this sort if thing is well known. You are shooting at imaginary targets, because the establishment is too cowardly to actually tackle the real issues.

Yes, and that Labour Party councilman should be immediately removed from his position.

You obviously didn't read the evidence I presented, so there's no real point responding to you.

[Greater Britannian Realm]

Lol. A leader of a Labour council described the victims of grooming gangs as “white trash” only just this summer. Instead of making up lurid rape fantasies about right wing misogyny - which apparently involve a lot of working class people - maybe it is time to audit the attitudes of the right thinking middle classes. After all, they are the ones running things, and are therefore ultimately responsible.

I’ll go further and add that the attitude of people from private schools towards this sort if thing is well known. You are shooting at imaginary targets, because the establishment is too cowardly to actually tackle the real issues.

Yes, and that Labour Party councilman should be immediately removed from his position.

You obviously didn't read the evidence I presented, so there's no real point responding to you.

Reminds me when the current deputy leader of labour called the grooming gang scandle a dog whistle.
Labour minister Lucy Powell sorry over grooming gangs 'dog whistle' remark

Starmer himself also did something similar and did his famous u-turns.
Starmer defends U-turn on grooming gangs inquiry

This shows how backwards Labours thinking is on the issue,
Its only digging their own graves and making the conspiracies worse.
And people ask why I dislike labour so heavily.

[Celritannia]

Yes, and that Labour Party councilman should be immediately removed from his position.

You obviously didn't read the evidence I presented, so there's no real point responding to you.

Reminds me when the current deputy leader of labour called the grooming gang scandle a dog whistle.
Labour minister Lucy Powell sorry over grooming gangs 'dog whistle' remark

Starmer himself also did something similar and did his famous u-turns.
Starmer defends U-turn on grooming gangs inquiry

This shows how backwards Labours thinking is on the issue,
Its only digging their own graves and making the conspiracies worse.
And people ask why I dislike labour so heavily.

Lucy Powell should have been removed.

TBH, Starmer should be replaced, but all the other candidates poll worse than him.

This is only the Labour Leadership, not the Labour Party as a whole.

[The Archregimancy]

This is why the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan failed. The lessons of that war from the far-left are "Don't invade countries". For the rest of us it's that human universalism, and its offspring of multiculturalism, are based upon a factual error. Not every culture is capable of having a western political system, and likewise, not every culture has people able to participate in a western society.

That's the most patronizing BS I've ever heard. Let's pat the Arabs on the head, they're not smart enough to have a democracy. It's definitely that, and not because the U.S. kept invading them.

Quick point of fact... Afghans aren't Arabs.

Pashtun and Dari aren't even related to Arabic as languages; they're Indo-European languages related to Farsi/Persian.

[Greater Britannian Realm]

Reminds me when the current deputy leader of labour called the grooming gang scandle a dog whistle.
Labour minister Lucy Powell sorry over grooming gangs 'dog whistle' remark

Starmer himself also did something similar and did his famous u-turns.
Starmer defends U-turn on grooming gangs inquiry

This shows how backwards Labours thinking is on the issue,
Its only digging their own graves and making the conspiracies worse.
And people ask why I dislike labour so heavily.

Lucy Powell should have been removed.

TBH, Starmer should be replaced, but all the other candidates poll worse than him.

This is only the Labour Leadership, not the Labour Party as a whole.

Sure I agree,
Also when I say labour i generally mean its front bench.
Not any of its voters and/or members.

[Magna-Parva]

One in three Labour voters thinks PM should go

[Lower Nubia]

One in three Labour voters thinks PM should go

He shouldn't resign, but he's not doing anything useful. Steady the ship while it's heading for rocks (Pension costs, Housing botleneck, energy costs) is just so ridiculous, and losing political capital on the winter fuel allowance to scrape back £7 billion pounds is just amateur failure.

[Crumpetopia]

This is why the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan failed. The lessons of that war from the far-left are "Don't invade countries". For the rest of us it's that human universalism, and its offspring of multiculturalism, are based upon a factual error. Not every culture is capable of having a western political system, and likewise, not every culture has people able to participate in a western society.

That's the most patronizing BS I've ever heard. Let's pat the Arabs on the head, they're not smart enough to have a democracy. It's definitely that, and not because the U.S. kept invading them.
Uruguay, Brazil, and Chile all had military dictatorships in the 20th century and are now all mostly stable democracies, with Uruguay being among the most democratic in the Americas (after Costa Rica only, in some rankings).
Japan had autocratic and militaristic rule for decades, but is now a full, if somewhat idiosyncratic, democracy.
Taiwan operates a successful democracy, while their neighbours the Chinese are still autocratic.
India operates a partial democracy, and would do far better if Narendra "not a Hindu nationalist at all" Modi weren't in power.
The claim that some cultures "just aren't suited to democracy" is straight-out racism.

Japan has been very nearly a one-party state for 70 years, given the LDP's near-constant ascension.
Indian civilisation is inherently amenable to constitutionalist ideas because in hinduism the Kshatriyas (warriors and therefore rulers for most of hindu history) are below the Brahmins, thus creating a culture inculcated for millennia with the idea that being a ruler does not mean absolute authority, but rather subordination to a higher authority. That they should have proved amenable to liberal democracy is thusly no anomaly.
Similarly, those south american countries are the civilisational descendents of Europe, and were therefore likewise familiar with a civilisation comprised of a labyrinthine system of rights and privileges devolved upon the population, and of course the roots of constitutionalism itself in the Catholic Church.
Taiwan is the only country on your list without a clear civilisational antecendant of democracy, and theirs only really began ~25 years ago. In my view, this can be attributed to the great upswell especially in the last 20 years or so of anti-Chinese sentiment (or more specifically, the rejection of "Chinese" identity in favour of "Taiwanese") on the island, which is perfectly congruent with a rejection of Chinese civilisational tradition.

People are not interchangeable units to be disposed of according to managerial whim; their acceptance or rejection of any given political formulation is heavily dependent on their metaphysics, and their conceptions what of the world, the individual and the state should be, to say nothing of social structure and economics as they bear upon the state-individual relationship. This is precisely why the rise of the Chinese middle class failed to produce the liberal revolution that so many predicted; these were people who believed and continue to believe that the system they live in works for them and accommodates their interests.

Unlike Ostro, I am racist, but this isn't a racialist argument (apart from anything else, I'm not a fan of democracy in the first place). It is instead a matter of assessing how culture interacts with political institutions and their legitimacy.

[East Dolinia]

Could I just say that I am a racist as well, please? Races are real just like breeds of dogs are real. Yes, races, colors, and dog breeds come in gradients and degrees, but can be differentiated and have very significant differences.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

love it when UK politics thread discuss the merits of "my lack of melanin means im axiomatically superior to everybody else" on Boxing Day.