Ukip - why are they gaining support?

[Awesome Wells]

Relax, don't do it, when you want to vote ukip

 

[Nylock]

Gentrification as I use it is how a population or parts of a population adapt to the exceptional and historically atypical social conditions of an economically developed economy and in so doing deviates from its traditional and surviving character, the population becomes economically specialised in order to service that economy and to afford its higher living costs and becomes dependent on its higher levels of amenity which I would argue is the intrinsic nature of economic and social class.

Have you run this through google translate or summat?

 

[Nylock]

Also:

...the native surviving British population...

...and who exactly are they?

Go on, this should be good for a laugh...

 

[butchersapron]

Relax, don't do it, when you want to vote ukip

Vote labour instead.

See the problem?

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

I haven't bothered with that Mike Read thing, I've every faith it's as bad as people say. But I'm a bit intrigued so many people have laid into him (including the other thread), saying it's either attrocious or laughable. I rather expected the angle to be that we should try and understand how it was that the bloke came to feel this way and to engage with his concerns.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...oslaw-iwaszkiewicz-_n_6015116.html?1413822237

There's been quite a bit of stuff going round about the repulsive Polish outfit that UKIP have hooked up with in a European grouping.

Brutal sexism, homophobia, racism, hitler apologism (adolf's tax policies were good and he didn't know about the holocaust apparently) and more besides.

Doubtless, someone in cyberspace with advanced insight will be angrily typing in Polish about the many levels of wrongness to actually saying that the reactionary hitler apologists are hitler apologists.

 

[DotCommunist]

I haven't bothered with that Mike Read thing, I've every faith it's as bad as people say. But I'm a bit intrigued so many people have laid into him (including the other thread), saying it's either attrocious or laughable. I rather expected the angle to be that we should try and understand how it was that the bloke came to feel this way and to engage with his concerns.

tedious bellend

 

[chilango]

I haven't bothered with that Mike Read thing, I've every faith it's as bad as people say. But I'm a bit intrigued so many people have laid into him (including the other thread), saying it's either attrocious or laughable. I rather expected the angle to be that we should try and understand how it was that the bloke came to feel this way and to engage with his concerns.

Is he a significant section of the working class?

 

[butchersapron]

I haven't bothered with that Mike Read thing, I've every faith it's as bad as people say. But I'm a bit intrigued so many people have laid into him (including the other thread), saying it's either attrocious or laughable. I rather expected the angle to be that we should try and understand how it was that the bloke came to feel this way and to engage with his concerns.

That's because you're a pointless passive aggressive clown who hasn't understood anything said to you on this issue for years.

 

[butchersapron]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...oslaw-iwaszkiewicz-_n_6015116.html?1413822237

There's been quite a bit of stuff going round about the repulsive Polish outfit that UKIP have hooked up with in a European grouping.

Brutal sexism, homophobia, racism, hitler apologism (adolf's tax policies were good and he didn't know about the holocaust apparently) and more besides.

Doubtless, someone in cyberspace with advanced insight will be angrily typing in Polish about the many levels of wrongness to actually saying that the reactionary hitler apologists are hitler apologists.

And stop crying ffs.

 

[redsquirrel]

tedious bellend

I was going to respond but you nailed it.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

just put him on ignore FFS

 

[Awesome Wells]

 

[butchersapron]

It's almost like this thread doesn't exist.

 

[treelover]

I wonder how many Tories secretly think this.

 

[inva]

I wonder how many Tories secretly think this.

why?

 

[butchersapron]

I wonder how many Tories secretly think this.

And if they do? It's not going to happen.

edit: tons of people think just that. It's meaningless.

 

[Awesome Wells]

I wonder how many Tories secretly think this.

He used to work (to use the term incorrectly) for Conservative Home.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

And if they do? It's not going to happen.

edit: tons of people think just that. It's meaningless.

Its meaningless that tons of people are frothing anti democrats?

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Is he a significant section of the working class?

Do those of us who dont own the means of production get a cuddle and a free pass if voting for those wankers? If there are sections of support we are allowed to criticise without beijng flamed, it would be useful to have them clarified. If those sections are basically former tory petty bourgeoise types then that seems to be the biggest contingent. Read happens to have been declared bankrupt (not least after a dismal musical about Oscar Wilde bellyflopped). Theres every chance he needs to sell his labour to get by.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I wonder how many Tories secretly think this.

Probably very few, if they're actual Tories, given that their raison d'etre is to conserve the status quo, not to alter it.

 

[Sprocket.]

given that their raison d'etre is to conserve the status quo.

I wondered how they kept going!
(This is a very old Lone Groover gag BTW)

 

[Quartz]

Have you got a proper cite for that? The nearest I can find is this, but it references a dead blog.

“Should people on benefits be allowed to vote?”

“It would be terribly ‘unfair’ of you to give equal representation rights to the chap who contributes 50 times more than the next person. In the same way as if you own 60% of shares of a company, you’ll get 60% of the voting rights at the Annual General Meeting.”

 

[ViolentPanda]

Its meaningless that tons of people are frothing anti democrats?

Wishing to alter/amend the electoral franchise doesn't automatically make anyone a "frothing anti-democrat", although it may make one a berk if your proposal would backfire all over your own party, as Mr Bursnall's proposal would.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I wondered how they kept going!

Horrible, isn't it? Rossi and Parfitt, the perfect voices of reaction for the Saga generation! When they were singing "whatever you want", they truly meant it, the free market bastards!

 

[Dogsauce]

I've seen that kind of opinion expressed many times on US libertarian blogs - remember one guy thinking you should get an extra vote if you owned property and so on.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Have you got a proper cite for that? The nearest I can find is this, but it references a dead blog.

Which just shows that the guy is too stupid or too ideologically-smitten to perceive the vast difference between company practice and the electoral franchise. Not really surprising if you believe in all that free market pie-in-the-sky.

 

[butchersapron]

I've seen that kind of opinion expressed many times on US libertarian blogs - remember one guy thinking you should get an extra vote if you owned property and so on.

It's bog-standard early pro-representative-democracy political theory. He who has the greatest investment in a state should have the greatest say. See the putney debates.

 

[Quartz]

I remember the Daily Mail coming out against(!) such an idea in the Thatcher era. 'One man Two votes' was their front-page headline.

 

[butchersapron]

It was alright for oxbridge and other posh universities right up until relatively recently.