Tommy Robinson, the court case and (guffaw) 'free speech'

[taffboy gwyrdd]

No it isn't. The problem is not believing the victims in the first place.

I'm not even sure they weren't believed as such, more that there was a sense of CBA partly due to class, partly to resources.

I suspect that can't prove that the excuse was put out that it was political correctness because the other 2 causes would make plod look worse.

Like "Christ, we can't say we couldn't be arsed, lets say something about not upsetting the community". One reason why it seems blaggish is that muslims people of colour are arrested, charged and convicted all the time for loads of different crimes. "not upsetting the community" never seems to be a problem then.

 

[Smoking kills]

This article puts it quite well.

Telford girls: the wrong kind of victims

OK, I'll bite.
Spiked to me is an alt right neo liberal monetised shit heap for faux left careerist wankers.
This article dismisses the rape and abuse of workers in the entertainment industry because the media, them, don't focus on other victims.
Nothing on "balance ton porc" bien sur.
As other posters above have put better than I could, this is structural, and righteous anger about child abuse is being weaponised.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

OK, I'll bite.
Spiked to me is an alt right neo liberal monetised shit heap for faux left careerist wankers.
This article dismisses the rape and abuse of workers in the entertainment industry because the media, them, don't focus on other victims.
Nothing on "balance ton porc" bien sur.
As other posters above have put better than I could, this is structural, and righteous anger about child abuse is being weaponised.

I see this stuff with my own eyes. But people want some kind of proof and that article points to some.

 

[Rob Ray]

What stuff would that be? What's being proved in that article?

 

[Magnus McGinty]

What stuff would that be? What's being proved in that article?

It points out the report that said social workers knew.

 

[Rob Ray]

That doesn't answer either of my questions.

 

[jusali]

OMFG my Father in Law
Secretly sidles up alongside me with a fash vid about TR and starts crapping on about Muslims. We have had to say to him that we can't talk politics any more because he can't entertain any other concept other than rampant right wing views. It's distressing as he is constantly on our case about being lily liberals and socialists and always having a dig. It's so sad as my wife is constantly worrying that it's her fault somehow. Brexit split this nation right down the middle and it's torn this family apart

 

[Magnus McGinty]

That doesn't answer either of my questions.

How’s about you put your intellectual prowess into working out how Robinson became a household name, and what we might do to counter it, and share your findings given you and others don’t like what I’ve had to say on the matter?

 

[Rob Ray]

I've not been slagging you off here Magnus, I'm asking you to expand on what the article proves and what you've seen with you own eyes - you made an assertion, back it up. You seem to have some sort of problem, so say it outright, prove your theory and outline your solution (or at least desired outcome).

Edit: Also it's not rocket science how Tommy Robinson's been making hay, he latches onto moral panics and links them to easy targets using tropes honed and propagated by the mass media for as long as any of us have been alive. He's been successful enough at doing so that he's built up a useful core following of boneheads who back him up and echo his talking points, and powerful allies in the new far-right media giving him a global reach. There's thousands of petty (and not so petty) dictators who have done similar before him, often with far greater results.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I've not been slagging you off here Magnus, I'm asking you to expand on what the article proves and what you've seen with you own eyes - you made an assertion, back it up. You seem to have some sort of problem, so say it outright, prove your theory and outline your solution (or at least desired outcome).

I’ve outlined my ‘theory’ earlier in the thread that the left’s refusal to have any kind of position on ‘grooming gangs’ has left it open for Robinson and co to present themselves as the only ones who care about the issue.
People then ask me to ‘prove’ this is the case which I’ve tried to do. But now I can’t be arsed. You know fine well that is the case unless you’ve spent the last few years holidaying on Mars. Those who do try and form a position on it are either attacked as racists or dismissed, which we can see playing out on this very thread.

 

[Rob Ray]

The "left" (which bit?) has written copiously about grooming gangs, usually pointing out that 90% of paedophiles in Britain are white, and that Telford was not particularly about race or religion, but about a combination of institutional failure, lack of funding and authority figures just not giving much of a shit about poor kids when it might threaten their own careers - something which has occurred under all councils, left, right or centrist, since the days of Robert Tressell and long before.

What I'm trying to work out is what you think Telford "proves" about particular failures of the left. Do you disagree with the above analysis? Do you think the left should have jumped in to demand Muslims apologise for being paedo-prone to forestall Tommy and co. from capitalising on the right press's racist dog-whistling? What are you looking for? I've not called you a racist once here Magnus, but I am confused as to what you think the left needs to be doing.

 

[krtek a houby]

OMFG my Father in Law
Secretly sidles up alongside me with a fash vid about TR and starts crapping on about Muslims. We have had to say to him that we can't talk politics any more because he can't entertain any other concept other than rampant right wing views. It's distressing as he is constantly on our case about being lily liberals and socialists and always having a dig. It's so sad as my wife is constantly worrying that it's her fault somehow. Brexit split this nation right down the middle and it's torn this family apart

That's awful.Does he actually know any Muslims, friends, co-workers?

 

[Pickman's model]

I’ve outlined my ‘theory’ earlier in the thread that the left’s refusal to have any kind of position on ‘grooming gangs’ has left it open for Robinson and co to present themselves as the only ones who care about the issue.
People then ask me to ‘prove’ this is the case which I’ve tried to do. But now I can’t be arsed. You know fine well that is the case unless you’ve spent the last few years holidaying on Mars. Those who do try and form a position on it are either attacked as racists or dismissed, which we can see playing out on this very thread.

refusal's quite an active word, magnus. do you have anything with which to support it? something along the lines of a declaration by an individual or organisation that they decline to have a position, you know the sort of thing.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

The "left" (which bit?) has written copiously about grooming gangs, usually pointing out that 90% of paedophiles in Britain are white, and that Telford was not particularly about race or religion, but about a combination of institutional failure, lack of funding and authority figures just not giving much of a shit about poor kids when it might threaten their own careers - something which has occurred under all councils, left, right or centrist, since the days of Robert Tressell and long before.

What I'm trying to work out is what you think Telford "proves" about particular failures of the left. Do you disagree with the above analysis? Do you think the left should have jumped in to demand Muslims apologise for being paedo-prone to forestall Tommy and co. from capitalising on the right press's racist dog-whistling? What are you looking for? I've not called you a racist once here Magnus, but I am confused as to what you think the left needs to be doing.

There’s lots of examples but one in particular is when the right mobilise against ‘grooming gangs’ (a subject which appears to draw popular support) the left mobilises against it.
I can see the temptation to not wanting fascists having a free stroll down the high street but it isn’t the best PR for a public wanting something to be done for offending that has gone on for years.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

refusal's quite an active word, magnus. do you have anything with which to support it? something along the lines of a declaration by an individual or organisation that they decline to have a position, you know the sort of thing.

Perhaps you could point to examples where the left do have positions on grooming gangs given your apparent astonishment that it’s somewhat lacking?

 

[Pickman's model]

Perhaps you could point to examples where the left do have positions on grooming gangs given your apparent astonishment that it’s somewhat lacking?

perhaps you could answer the question: although you indicate an answer (in the negative) you might be explicit.

i don't know where you get the apparent astonishment it's lacking bit from, i agree with Rob Ray that it's something which has been extensively written about. i'm asking YOU to support YOUR claim that people have refused to have a position on it. not an omission, an actual refusal, a declaration that such a decision has been taken.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

perhaps you could answer the question: although you indicate an answer (in the negative) you might be explicit.

It’s difficult to prove a negative. So back to my question to you.

 

[Pickman's model]

It’s difficult to prove a negative. So back to my question to you.

right. so you admit there hasn't been a refusal. i rest my case, m'lud

 

[Magnus McGinty]

right. so you admit there hasn't been a refusal. i rest my case, m'lud

You haven’t submitted your evidence to the contrary. So all you’ve proven is a clumsy use of a word.

 

[Rob Ray]

when the right mobilise against ‘grooming gangs’ (a subject which appears to draw popular support) the left mobilises against it

So we deal with this in what way? Turn out a couple dozen old folks to say "bad things are indeed bad" and ignore Tommy? How far down that rabbit hole do we want to go, turn out every time there's a bottling on a Friday night to demand less of that sort of thing?

Robinson's tactics draw on opportunistically picking out events that he can frame as solvable by sorting out the "Muslim problem." Which they can't be, and he knows they can't, but it taps into the latent mistrust of Other in (sections of) the general public. He's not actually addressing paedophilia as a structural issue, just exploiting the frothy bits which he can fit into tabloid spectacle. It's a vile strategy which yes makes returns on Facebook but only by sacrificing the possibility of actual useful change.

But even were we to use that same morally repugnant approach, "get our hands dirty" by diverting the real needs of vulnerable young people into a cycle of political one-upmanship, it's still shit ground for us because "actually this is quite complicated and no-one, including the general public, comes out looking particularly good here" is a rubbish populist banner.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

So we deal with this in what way? Turn out a couple dozen old folks to say "bad things are indeed bad" and ignore Tommy? How far down that rabbit hole do we want to go, turn out every time there's a bottling on a Friday night to demand less of that sort of thing?

Robinson's tactics draw on opportunistically picking out events that he can frame as solvable by sorting out the "Muslim problem." Which they can't be, and he knows they can't, but it taps into the latent mistrust of Other in the general public. He's not actually addressing paedophilia as a structural issue, just exploiting the frothy bits which he can fit into tabloid spectacle. It's a vile strategy which yes makes returns on Facebook but only by sacrificing the possibility of actual useful change.

But even were we to use that same morally repugnant approach, "get our hands dirty" by diverting the real needs of vulnerable young people into a cycle of political one-upmanship, it's still shit ground for us because "actually this is quite complicated and no-one, including the general public, comes out looking particularly good here" is a rubbish populist banner.

It isn’t complicated. It’s an abuse of power by organised men against vulnerable, mostly working class girls. It’s absolutely perfect for the left to make noise about. That they tend to see it as taboo yet don’t have the same issue with Savile or Weinstein actually exposes their own racism.

 

[Pickman's model]

I’ve outlined my ‘theory’ earlier in the thread that the left’s refusal to have any kind of position on ‘grooming gangs’ has left it open for Robinson and co to present themselves as the only ones who care about the issue.

soz could you point me to the post where you outlined your 'theory'?

 

[Magnus McGinty]

soz could you point me to the post where you outlined your 'theory'?

You missed the scare quotes? I’ve made points, others have claimed it to be a theory.

 

[Rob Ray]

Of course it's complicated. What communities did these people live in? Why did the media/political class react the way it did? What institutional changes can actually make a difference? What cultural changes are needed, not just around the friendships and family circles the gang operated in but at the shops they went to, the social centres their mates frequented. And not just there, because paedophilia and silence about it is endemic all over Britain. Police disinterest in the problems of vulnerable/troubled/troublesome young women is endemic. Austerity cuts which undermine the ability of social services to do their job properly and defangs oversight bodies to prevent corruption is too.

And all this is layperson, top of the head stuff, I'm no expert in coming up with the right questions. Properly analysing and changing the situation involves looking at a kaleidoscope, while all Tommy has to do is single out a colour.

And that analysis is something the left has tried to do - the problem is that the kaleidoscope takes time and resources to work through, and saying "it's class, gimme a couple weeks and I'll show you" is not something that gets you a Daily Mail (or even a Daily MIrror) column the next day.

 

[Pickman's model]

You missed the scare quotes? I’ve made points, others have claimed it to be a theory.

i'm not seeing you saying anything about the left's refusal before your post 369

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Of course it's complicated. What communities did these people live in? Why did the media/political class react the way it did? What institutional changes can actually make a difference? What cultural changes are needed, not just around the friendships and family circles the gang operated in but at the shops they went to, the social centres their mates frequented. And not just there, because paedophilia and silence about it is endemic all over Britain. Police disinterest in the problems of vulnerable/troubled/troublesome young women is endemic. Austerity cuts which undermine the ability of social services to do their job properly and defangs oversight bodies to prevent corruption is too.

And all this is layperson, top of the head stuff, I'm no expert in coming up with the right questions. Properly analysing and changing the situation involves looking at a kaleidoscope, while all Tommy has to do is single out a colour.

And this is something the left has tried to do - the problem is that the kaleidoscope takes time and resources to work through, and saying "it's class, gimme a couple weeks and I'll show you" is not something that gets you a Daily Mail (or even a Daily MIrror) column the next day.

Fair points.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

i'm not seeing you saying anything about the left's refusal before your post 369

Must we do an autopsy on all my posts? From memory I spoke of the void Robinson moved into and how that might have come about.

 

[jusali]

That's awful.Does he actually know any Muslims, friends, co-workers?

No he's classic Middle England Retiree.

 

[Pickman's model]

Must we do an autopsy on all my posts? From memory I spoke of the void Robinson moved into and how that might have come about.

we're not doing doing an autopsy on all your posts. you said 'people refused', which i submit - and this isn't a pedantic point - is significantly different from 'the left refused'. in addition, in regard to telford, the mainstream media published almost nothing on the issue between 23 may 2013 (which was a brief paragraph in north wales daily post and south wales echo about a dispatches programme on the issue) and 11 march 2018, when the daily star carried a report.

the only exception i could find was several articles in the daily mirror in 2016. so, this refusal / omission / whatever, if it existed, was shared by virtually all the press of the country. any void you may perceive is due to there being so little about it in the press or tv, and searches for telford and abuse, or rape, or grooming reveal there are very few posts on the subject here. perhaps the vast majority of people here have no view on the subject, have taken no position on it.

 

[existentialist]

I’ve outlined my ‘theory’ earlier in the thread that the left’s refusal to have any kind of position on ‘grooming gangs’ has left it open for Robinson and co to present themselves as the only ones who care about the issue.
People then ask me to ‘prove’ this is the case which I’ve tried to do. But now I can’t be arsed. You know fine well that is the case unless you’ve spent the last few years holidaying on Mars. Those who do try and form a position on it are either attacked as racists or dismissed, which we can see playing out on this very thread.

I don't think the left has "refused to have any kind of position on 'grooming gangs'" - they've just tended to take somewhat less of a hysterical view of the issue.

The reason that RW fuckwits like TR are able to do what they do is because whipping up hysterical reactions on the basis of at best broad-brush sweeping generalities, and at worst complete falsehood is always more newsworthy than carefully reasoned arguments challenging what gets touted as "common sense".