the long-awaited 'why the telegraph is going downhill' thread

[William of Walworth]

Indeed, but while a charity should indeed do things like lobby politicians, a charity working on behalf of and shilling for a political party is a whole different matter.

The Red Cross are actually doing this then, are they? Do elaborate ....

 

[butchersapron]

The Red Cross are actually doing this then, are they? Do elaborate ....

Quartz's rather confused position appears to be that of course they don't do that but it would be bad if they did, which he doesn't think they do. He just wanted to say that it would be bad if they did do that. Which they don't. And he wanted to say it in relation to an article that says that they do. But he thinks they don't. It would just be bad if they did.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Because a charity should work to charitable ends, not political ones.

The histories of charitable institutions in the UK (all 700+ years of it) tells us that though they should they very rarely have. In fact many charities are inherently political, although nowadays (in accordance with Charities Commission diktat) they're not overtly political or partisanly political.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Indeed, but while a charity should indeed do things like lobby politicians, a charity working on behalf of and shilling for a political party is a whole different matter.

The Red Cross aren't acting as shills for anything except their own charitable ideology, and the perpetuation of their institution. They are, in fact, past masters at navigating the demands of national governments, and minimising the effects of those demands.

 

[nino_savatte]

Indeed, but while a charity should indeed do things like lobby politicians, a charity working on behalf of and shilling for a political party is a whole different matter.

That's the sort of narrative that I'd expect from Dan Hannan or *coughs* Brendan O'Neill. But you're going to have to produce a specific example of a charity (one that is involved in relief) "shilling" for a political party to convince me of the merits of your argument.

Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with the work of the British Red Cross.
http://www.redcross.org.uk/
And the ICRC.
http://www.icrc.org/eng/index.jsp
And the IFRC.
http://www.ifrc.org/en/who-we-are/directory/web-pages/

Then get back to me.

 

[nino_savatte]

The histories of charitable institutions in the UK (all 700+ years of it) tells us that though they should they very rarely have. In fact many charities are inherently political, although nowadays (in accordance with Charities Commission diktat) they're not overtly political or partisanly political.

Indeed, Policy Exchange - obscenely enough - is a registered charity.

 

[Quartz]

The Red Cross are actually doing this then, are they? Do elaborate ....

Psst... read message #110 above. I'm talking about the general, not specific.

 

[Quartz]

And here's what appears to be a clumsy attempt to get a charity to work to political ends.

 

[stavros]

The Telegraph and their brethren spontaneously ejaculate en masse at the prospect of the BBC being downsized.

 

[Quartz]

Well, the payoffs at the top were pretty disgusting.

 

[nino_savatte]

Today Satan's right-hand man, Norman Tebbitt, says:
Career unemployment and immigration: why the nation has turned against welfare claimants
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/n...-nation-has-turned-against-welfare-claimants/

No mention of the lack of real jobs and stagnating wages. Yeah, just blame those immigrants.

 

[Greebo]

Today Satan's right-hand man, Norman Tebbitt<snip>

What a waste of a halfway adequate education that miserable excuse of a man is. The article reads like something computer generated from material which even the Daily Mail thought unfit to print.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Certainly one is that back in the Seventies and Eighties there was a lot less unemployment...

Umm...

There was a great deal of "concealed unemployment", mostly in the form of overmanning in manufacturing industry

Unemployed people concealing themselves in... paid employment. Riiiiight.

Long-term unemployment was concentrated amongst older men made redundant from declining industries, particularly mining

Yes. Quite.

A second factor has been immigration

On yer bike.

A less immediately obvious change over the half century has been within our state education system. It is not just that standards of literacy and numeracy have fallen in the last 25 years...

Evidence?

...but that there has been a long-term cultural change. Pupils have been encouraged to dream about the jobs that they would like to have, regardless of the realities of their talents and the labour market. In real life there are not that many jobs as celebrities, fashion designers or film stars

Corrected for you.



I'm too bored to continue. Just fuck off, Tebbit.

 

[Gingerman]

The rancid old cunt making a timely appearance just as Halloween approaches....

 

[el-ahrairah]

i hate norman tebbitt so much.

 

[Favelado]

It's strange how unemployment was such an unpopular career when the economy was doing well.

 

[nino_savatte]

What a waste of a halfway adequate education that miserable excuse of a man is. The article reads like something computer generated from material which even the Daily Mail thought unfit to print.

Aye, true. He's like some kind of bile dispenser.

 

[Gingerman]

Looks more and more decrepit every time he's wheeled out from whatever dungeon they keep the aul fucker locked up in.....

 

[stavros]

How are the Telegraph covering the Brooks-Coulson trial? I understood there'd always been a pact between the major publishing houses not to slag one another off.

 

[brogdale]

How are the Telegraph covering the Brooks-Coulson trial? I understood there'd always been a pact between the major publishing houses not to slag one another off.

tbh, no discernable differences to other msm reporting...

Rebekah Brooks was “active” in a conspiracy to hack phones while she was editor of The News of the World, the Old Bailey has heard.

She went on to approve “quite large sums” of money to public officials for information after she was appointed to edit The Sun, a jury was told.

The prosecution today began opening its case against Mrs Brooks, who became chief executive of Rupert Murdoch...

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

i hate norman tebbitt so much.

when I was a kid my dad told us that tebbitts were like rabbits crossed with teddy bears

 

[nino_savatte]

Here's Dan 'Tribal Loyalty' Hodges latest offering.

The Red Guard are wrecking the trade unions
Len McCluskey is scared. It’s not a state of mind normally associated with the head of Britain’s most influential and aggressive trade union. But this morning, the Unite leader is a worried man.

Earlier in the week, McCluskey had a bitter and very public humiliation. He led his union into dispute with Ineos, the owners of the giant Grangemouth refinery. The senior Unite conveyor at the plant, Stevie Deans, was already under investigation by the company over allegations about attempts to rig the selection of Labour’s parliamentary candidate in Falkirk.

The union asked its members to down tools. In response, Ineos called Unite’s bluff, and threatened to close the entire plant. Facing the loss of more than 800 jobs, and the destruction of Scotland’s chemical production capacity, McCluskey and Unite folded. Deans resigned.

More by Dan Hodges
• Ed Miliband is a political Jack Charlton
• Falkirk has damaged the Labour Party's credibility
• If you want to save the Beeb, drop the licence fee
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100243774/the-red-guard-are-wrecking-the-trade-unions/

Red Guard? McCluskey? Put down the crack pipe, Dan.

This comment made me laugh... but not for the right reasons.

Britain's workers need unions.

Just not this union.

Britain's people need a socialist party

Just not the Labour party.

Britain needs a government

Just not this government

Britain needs Europe

Just not the EU.

Vote UKIP and get it all.

 

[nino_savatte]

Doc Stanley pulls this turd from his arse.

I can't quite believe that I've just sat through ten minutes of BBC television in which British journalists Owen Jones and Zoe Williams have defended Karl Marx as the prophet of the End of Capitalism. Unbelievable because I had thought Marxism was over with the fall of the Berlin Wall – when we discovered that socialism was one part bloodshed, one part farce. But unbelievable also because you'd have to be a pretty lacking in moral sensitivity to defend a thinker whose work sent millions of people to an early grave.

I don't want to have to rehearse the numbers but, apparently, they're not being taught in schools anymore – so here goes. Sixty-five million were murdered in China – starved, hounded to suicide, shot as class traitors. Twenty million in the USSR, 2 million in North Korea, 1.7 million in Africa. The nightmare of Cambodia (2 million dead) is especially vivid. "Reactionaries" were sorted out from the base population on the grounds of being supporters of the old regime, having gone to school or just for wearing glasses. They were taken to the side of paddy fields and hacked to death by teenagers.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/t...nd-them-of-the-millions-who-died-in-his-name/

It's the usual 'Marxist have killed more people than capitalism' trope. Of course the idiots on the comments threads are repeating the 'Nazis were leftists' canard... as you'd expect them to.

This comment is just nuts.

global city
• 23 minutes ago
Yes, quite well put.

Marx did indeed make some interesting observations, but then so did Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and Lenin also. From these comments though you cannot extrapolate out into concluding that the fundamental conclusions of their main work and thoughts being right too.

We know the tricks and the slipperiness of the Left.

Let me get this straight: Hitler made some "interesting observations"? He's being obtuse but I wonder what "observations" he's referring to?

 

[seventh bullet]

?

 

[frogwoman]

There was a great deal of "concealed unemployment", mostly in the form of overmanning in manufacturing industry

sounds reasonable - wait. what?

 

[frogwoman]

Let me get this straight: Hitler made some "interesting observations"? He's being obtuse but I wonder what "observations" he's referring to?

In the 30s the Nazi party introduced an early form of workfare - to say that he somehow eradicated unemployment is distorting the truth a little bit. Maybe that's what's "interesting"

 

[nino_savatte]

In the 30s the Nazi party introduced an early form of workfare - to say that he somehow eradicated unemployment is distorting the truth a little bit. Maybe that's what's "interesting"

Sounds familiar....

 

[yield]

Doc Stanley pulls this turd from his arse.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/t...nd-them-of-the-millions-who-died-in-his-name/

I write about this subject with the ferocity of a convert. I was once a Marxist and I once fooled myself that there was a distinction between economic analysis and practical despotism. There isn't. I wish this could be patiently explained to the dumb kids who put Marx on their wall and wail about the unique EVIL of a capitalist system that has actually lifted millions from misery and proven to be a close ally of democracy. It's an education every bit as vital as the one we give about fascism.

"I was once a Marxist and I once fooled myself that there was a distinction between economic analysis and practical despotism."

What does that mean?

 

[nino_savatte]

"I was once a Marxist and I once fooled myself that there was a distinction between economic analysis and practical despotism."

What does that mean?

That's what passes for right-wing 'analysis'.

 

[ViolentPanda]

?

Didn't we have a bit of a Khmer Rouge-themed caption competition last time you posted that?