Privileged people calling less privileged people "stupid" doesn't seem to be working...

[Pickman's model]

This is hilarious. Why are you so emotionally invested in such an abstract point?

In a historical discussion, normal people would characterise it as errors or foolishness. They wouldn't call it "lies".

History is not abstract. normal people don't feel the need to tell untruths about it as you do.

 

[Idaho]

Maybe they are errors in my understanding rather than sinister lies. Or maybe that is a lie.

 

[Pickman's model]

Maybe they are errors in my understanding rather than sinister lies. Or maybe that is a lie.

Your relationship with the truth, your understanding, your knowledge: all found wanting

 

[ViolentPanda]

Maybe they are errors in my understanding rather than sinister lies. Or maybe that is a lie.

I'd recommend Christopher Clark's "The Sleepwalkers" and Adam Tooze's "Deluge" as excellent - and extremely interesting - primers on the pre- and post-WW1 economic history of the major participant nation-states in the war.

 

[Idaho]

Your relationship with the truth, your understanding, your knowledge: all found wanting

You don't get it, do you? There is nothing to be gained from your type of policing of p&p. You are like a socially inept pub bore who's single joy is to find fault and mark it out. You don't see this as in any way problematic to useful and functional discussion. You have no awareness of how it makes p&p a forum dominated and controlled by a small clique of male urban lifers. I don't have anything against you personally. I'm really not one for board spats or grudges. I would just love to see a politics board that wasn't policed by political train spotting androids who killed off discussions while all the while thinking that they were furthering the cause of truth.

 

[Idaho]

I'd recommend Christopher Clark's "The Sleepwalkers" and Adam Tooze's "Deluge" as excellent - and extremely interesting - primers on the pre- and post-WW1 economic history of the major participant nation-states in the war.

Thanks. I'll take a look to see if they are on audio book.

 

[Pickman's model]

You don't get it, do you? There is nothing to be gained from your type of policing of p&p. You are like a socially inept pub bore who's single joy is to find fault and mark it out. You don't see this as in any way problematic to useful and functional discussion. You have no awareness of how it makes p&p a forum dominated and controlled by a small clique of male urban lifers. I don't have anything against you personally. I'm really not one for board spats or grudges. I would just love to see a politics board that wasn't policed by political train spotting androids who killed off discussions while all the while thinking that they were furthering the cause of truth.

Yes. time and time and fucking time again you bring this back to ad hominem attacks (socially inept pub bore) in between lies (eg your Disney anastasia post) while ignoring the points being made eg pre-1917 Russian industrialisation, and of course your utterly historically illiterate bollocks about nice romanovs v nasty bolsheviks. this isn't me or butchers being cunts but your bringing a pisspoor dog's dinner of a case (in its loosest sense) to this thread and showing a complete inability to defend it.

 

[Idaho]

Yes you are right. I retract all comments and request forgiveness.

 

[Pickman's model]

Yes you are right. I retract all comments and request forgiveness.

I'd prefer it if you'd just say who said the romanovs were grand

 

[Idaho]

No one. I made it up to get attention. I'm very very sorry.

 

[Shechemite]

the inevitable side effect of never offering a theory or opinion while picking apart others, is that people will assume you are on the autistic spectrum.

Wow

 

[seventh bullet]

There are people on the right that will acknowledge no good coming from the Russian revolution. That the whole process and its aftermath was retrograde and destructive.

The idea of getting your boss killed might sound very punk rock - but must have been terrible. The vindictiveness, the scores settled, the blackmail.

Nothing to do with 'punk rock'. Or the other things you mentioned, except perhaps the behaviour of bosses (or Little Stalins, as they were known). I thought you knew about Stalinist industrialisation.

 

[Pickman's model]

No one. I made it up to get attention. I'm very very sorry.

Yeh. well maybe you've learned a lesson and maybe you haven't.

 

[Idaho]

I could offer to fellate you to prove my sincerity. Do you like fellatio?

 

[Pickman's model]

I could offer to fellate you to prove my sincerity. Do you like fellatio?

I think you've managed to prove your insincerity in a manner few if any urbanites would have expected

 

[butchersapron]

I could offer to fellate you to prove my sincerity. Do you like fellatio?

Thank you for your positive enlightening posts.

 

[Idaho]

Feel free to bring the thread back on topic with an insightful post.

 

[Cid]

Feel free to bring the thread back on topic with an insightful post.

You know you're not coming back from this right? You've just solidly painted yourself into the cunt corner.

 

[Idaho]

I've always styled myself more of a twat than a cunt. But I can show some flexibility.

 

[redsquirrel]

You don't get it, do you? There is nothing to be gained from your type of policing of p&p.

Once again, random use of the term "liberal" creates confusion. Americans and the Internet.... The proto alt right of the early Internet made the term popular as a pejorative to describe socially liberal, economic centrists in America. The fringe left in the UK, wanting to distance themselves from the British centre left, eagerly adopted the term.

Consequently it now makes only vague sense (an ideal fit for the fringe left). Especially when suddenly the centre left are supposed to justify their "liberal" credentials. In the context of the referendum, it doesn't help anyones understanding.

Capital punishment would be a better example of the hypocrisy/paradox. Centrists have long opposed it, while upholding a belief in democracy (capital punishment being clearly popular).

At least PMs "policing" is usual correct unlike the rubbish above

 

[Brainaddict]

At the risk of re-awakening a monster... I have never called people stupid over voting Brexit or making other decisions I disagree with. However are we allowed to say that people were conned? This isn't particularly a class issue, or not a working/middle class one. I work in a public sector organisation, my part of it is probably about 50/50 working/middle class. The vast majority are non-unionised, and appear to agree that 'there is no money' to pay them more or make up for the real terms pay cuts of the last 8 years. This is what people being conned looks like. Is it patronising to point out they are being conned? How to talk about it?

This post inspired by this article: Notes from Non-Existence | Mute

In other words, the high-end flagfuckers look forward to intensifying the punishment of the pro- and anti-Brexit parts of the proletariat alike. This is why it's fair to say that working-class voters for Little England were elaborately conned, but – contrary to Guardian-circulated slander – are not stupid. As Iceberg Slim taught, the ‘mark’ in a really long white con may end up fooled, but s/he should not be treated as a fool. And who wouldn’t take an apparently cost-free chance to humiliate Cameron and Osborne? The costs will come later but they would have come anyway.

 

[Pickman's model]

At the risk of re-awakening a monster... I have never called people stupid over voting Brexit or making other decisions I disagree with. However are we allowed to say that people were conned? This isn't particularly a class issue, or not a working/middle class one.

so being conned isn't a class issue even though the people who are doing the conning are apparently ruling class. top work then brainaddict.

 

[Brainaddict]

so being conned isn't a class issue even though the people who are doing the conning are apparently ruling class. top work then brainaddict.

I deliberately clarified that it wasn't a middle/working class issue - the rest was implied. But you can just read the bits of my post that raise your ire if you like.

 

[Pickman's model]

I deliberately clarified that it wasn't a middle/working class issue - the rest was implied. But you can just read the bits of my post that raise your ire if you like.

yes. it is not a middle / working class issue that the conning is done by the ruling class. like it's not a working or middle class issue that 'the ruling ideas of every age are the ideas of the ruling class' or 'the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles'

 

[butchersapron]

Mute of course taking money from the EU and the arts council.

State funded autonomy.

 

[butchersapron]

I have no idea what that mute piece is saying.

 

[butchersapron]

I don't like it though.

 

[Pickman's model]

I have no idea what that mute piece is saying.

it is a mute piece. it is not intended to be understood.

 

[JimW]

At the risk of re-awakening a monster... I have never called people stupid over voting Brexit or making other decisions I disagree with. However are we allowed to say that people were conned? This isn't particularly a class issue, or not a working/middle class one. I work in a public sector organisation, my part of it is probably about 50/50 working/middle class. The vast majority are non-unionised, and appear to agree that 'there is no money' to pay them more or make up for the real terms pay cuts of the last 8 years. This is what people being conned looks like. Is it patronising to point out they are being conned? How to talk about it?

This post inspired by this article: Notes from Non-Existence | Mute

Not read the article but on the face of it saying conned falls down on the same thing as thick for me - people might have voted out under some mistaken impressions but why are they more dupes than the plenty who voted in without really knowing what the EU is and our membership of it entails/approves? Basically it's just a truism about how voting works in a bourgeois democracy isn't it?

 

[butchersapron]

Not read the article but on the face of it saying conned falls down on the same thing as thick for me - people might have voted out under some mistaken impressions but why are they more dupes than the plenty who voted in without really knowing what the EU is and our membership of it entails/approves? Basically it's just a truism about how voting works in a bourgeois democracy isn't it?

But only one type of people are conned.