Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

what does emily benn tell us about the state of politics

Sure. There's no fascist takeover. Berlesconni doesnt compare his crowd to falange, Operation Paperclip didnt happen, Bushs grand dad didnt fund the nazis. Elite global robber barons dont rip us off every single day. China, a tyranny founded on mass executions, isnt a darling of global capitalism. The government doesnt want to eyescan and fingerprint us for a database, RFID isnt going into all numberplates and all the wars are fought for good reason with the full consent of the people. There is nothing to worry about. This video contains no truth


Thanks for turning me back on to the kool aid.

Whoever said the price of liberty is eternal vigilance was clearly wrong. It must be semantic pedantry instead.

This is a classic example of exactly what is wrong with all this "sheeple" shit. Everybody who disagrees with you must be a supine fool, incapable of seeing that we don't live in a perfect world.
 
The tories have been doing it for as long as there's been tories. They just generally mix up their names so that they don't actually sound as if they're their fathers sons.

The Churchills skipped a generation between Winston Senior and Winston Junior didn't they. But iirc one of Winston Junior's sons is 'in' politics too but not sure what he does.

Not really surprised at Emily Benn because parliamentary politics is a function of the professional classes for both Labour and Tory alike, and certain professions have a caste-like tinge (notably law and medicine).

It's possible she is really is very bright and able but anyone who thinks family connections have nothing to do with her selection is a mug.
 
The Churchills skipped a generation between Winston Senior and Winston Junior didn't they. But iirc one of Winston Junior's sons is 'in' politics too but not sure what he does.

Not really surprised at Emily Benn because parliamentary politics is a function of the professional classes for both Labour and Tory alike, and certain professions have a caste-like tinge (notably law and medicine).

It's possible she is really is very bright and able but anyone who thinks family connections have nothing to do with her selection is a mug.

Grandpa Tony tells stories of meeting prime ministers and so on when he was a child and of being surrounded by seriously influential grown-ups discussing Politics. Gore Vidal has similar stories, so I think has Nicholas Soames*. It's what comes of growing up in a political household.

When I was a kid the main topic of conversation was local football. I rebelled but my bro became a referee and then a sports photographer for a while. I don't see wanting to follow the family obsession as a bad thing- in some ways it's a surprise there aren't more political dynasties- and inevitably those who already have influence and contacts will ensure that the child knows how to network their way into selection committees, newspaper puffs and so on, it's what we'll all try to do for our children in whatever way we can.

Of course, there's no reason at all for any electorate to take any notice of her. I've never really been aware of her until this thread, why would I, sfaics she's done nothing of any interest.



Nicholas Soames: He was born in Croydon and is a grandson of Sir Winston Churchill, the son of Lord Soames and Baroness Soames, a nephew of the former Defence Secretary Duncan Sandys and Diana Churchill; the journalist Randolph Churchill and the actress and dancer Sarah Churchill and a great nephew of the founders of the Scout movement, Robert Baden-Powell and Olave Baden-Powell.
 
I don't see wanting to follow the family obsession as a bad thing- in some ways it's a surprise there aren't more political dynasties- and inevitably those who already have influence and contacts will ensure that the child knows how to network their way into selection committees, newspaper puffs and so on, it's what we'll all try to do for our children in whatever way we can.

Re number of political dynasties, you would expect them to be less common than business dynasties. And there is perhaps some vague expectation of numbers in relation to the size of population being governed. It does seem a bit odd for example that in a very populous nation like the USA there's been a Bush or a Clinton on just about every national ticket since 1980.

Re what we all try to do for our children, yes that's to be expected, although some more than others. You can surely see the contradiction with public pronouncements in favour of meritocratic selection for influential jobs.
 
Sure. There's no fascist takeover. Berlesconni doesnt compare his crowd to falange, Operation Paperclip didnt happen, Bushs grand dad didnt fund the nazis. Elite global robber barons dont rip us off every single day. China, a tyranny founded on mass executions, isnt a darling of global capitalism. The government doesnt want to eyescan and fingerprint us for a database, RFID isnt going into all numberplates and all the wars are fought for good reason with the full consent of the people. There is nothing to worry about. This video contains no truth


Thanks for turning me back on to the kool aid.

Whoever said the price of liberty is eternal vigilance was clearly wrong. It must be semantic pedantry instead.


That's not a fascist takeover - not by any strech of a fevered and sick imagination. That's a) a rhetorical trick designed to shore up internal support (and if you knew your history as well as you should you'd know that the Falange were a meaningless fig-leaf with no real power, an ideological fig leaf for simple authoritarian catholocism and social conservatism) b) a typical piece of large scale political opportunism in the anticipated conditons of renewed global tensions Post WW2 3) a commitment to making money not an ideological family commitment to fascism. 4) That's capitalism 5) Ditto 6) that's authoritarianism and politcal playing to the gallery 7) That's major powers seeking to ensure control/supply of potentially scare resources and transport networks in competition with other powers - capitalism.

Come back when you've got some politics.
 
That's not a fascist takeover - not by any strech of a fevered and sick imagination. That's a) a rhetorical trick designed to shore up unternal support (and if you knew your histiory as wella s you should you'd know that the Falange were a meaningless fig-leaf wirth no power, an idiological fig fleaf for simple authoritarian catholocims and social conservatism) b) a typical piee of large scale poltial opportunims in the anticipated conditons of renewed global tensions Post WW2 3) a commitment to making money not an ideological family commitment to fascism. 4) That's capitalism 5) Ditto 6) that's authoritarianism and politcal playing to the gallery 7) That's major powers seekig to ensure control/supply of potentially scare resources and transport networks in competition with other powers - capitalism.

Come back when you've got some politics.

What do you know? You are obviously just a sheeple, because you disagree. That is what sheeple do.

:rolleyes:
 
Re what we all try to do for our children, yes that's to be expected, although some more than others. You can surely see the contradiction with public pronouncements in favour of meritocratic selection for influential jobs.

yes of course I can. The point is not that parents use contacts for what might be called nepotism (or could simply be called helping though love) nor that others attempt to curry favour with the parents (or grandparents) through promoting the offspring. This is politics, it's up to us, the people, to ignore those who achieve prominence simply through family connections.

Thing is, this thread is not ignoring someone who is otherwise entirely ignorable. It's brought her to my attention, and possibly to others, simply because of who she is, not what she's done. There will always now be a tickle of recognition- her family have had to do nothing, we've done this all by ourselves.
 
yes of course I can. The point is not that parents use contacts for what might be called nepotism (or could simply be called helping though love) nor that others attempt to curry favour with the parents (or grandparents) through promoting the offspring. This is politics, it's up to us, the people, to ignore those who achieve prominence simply through family connections.

Thing is, this thread is not ignoring someone who is otherwise entirely ignorable. It's brought her to my attention, and possibly to others, simply because of who she is, not what she's done. There will always now be a tickle of recognition- her family have had to do nothing, we've done this all by ourselves.
Because if politicos ignore people who use family connections to achieve positions of power, they'll just go away :rolleyes:
 
Because if politicos ignore people who use family connections to achieve positions of power, they'll just go away :rolleyes:

No they won't go away but I'm not sure what positive effect comes from discussing them before they actually achieve any power. Doesn't increased name recognition just makes it more likely they will?

The hundreds of other prospective Labour candidates won't go away either, more's the pity, the only things that mark her out is her family background (and perhaps her youth).
 
No they won't go away but I'm not sure what positive effect comes from discussing them before they actually achieve any power. Doesn't increased name recognition just makes it more likely they will?
I somehow doubt being discussed on Urban75's P+P boards is going to massively increase Emily Benn's recognisability.
 
I agree but it's part of the pattern. In pointing out that I'd never really been aware of her prior to this thread I was trying to show that in discussing her we are a (terribly minor) part of the process whereby her family background promotes her. The family don't need to actually do anything at all, we do it for them, as much by insulting her where we're not insulting the ppc for the next constituency as by some journalist hoping that by interviewing her they'll get a chance to interview her father or grandfather.
 
Well, there has always been some MPs with that background and it is bad if there's too many of them so I basically agree with you. But that is not a good argument against a few able schoolkids getting selected as PPCs, is it?

I doubt if Jo Swinson had much life experience before first getting selected at age 21 and getting elected at her third attempt at age 25, but she's not been a total disaster.

And I know that people like Jim Murphy fit your archetype of the NUS and party hack, but in fact he has real personal experience of "the real world" and he's a better MP and minister for it.

There are some young people with a passion for politics, and a few of them deserve a chance. I mean, look at how well that nice William Hague turned out!

It's not about people not being a "total disaster", it's about being represented by people who, if they can at all, will have a hard job empathising with their poorest constituents, and will therefore have a hard job representing their views and interests.
 
As I have pointed out on some philosophy threads, it displays a contempt for humanity. It is a dehumanizing term. It means you can group large amounts of people without considering them as actual human beings.

And yes, it does imply that the user thinks he has found the truth and that the rest of the population, that he is enlightened and everybody else is an unthinking zombie.

This attitude terrifies me.

No it implies that majorities of people often act in herd like ways. Which they clearly do, that you cant see or have not noticed this is your own ignorance/dishonesty.

The upcoming Tory landslide victory the sheeple are soon to make a reality when the election is called, is just the first of many examples.
 
No it implies that majorities of people often act in herd like ways. Which they clearly do, that you cant see or have not noticed this is your own ignorance/dishonesty.

The upcoming Tory landslide victory the sheeple are soon to make a reality when the election is called, is just the first of many examples.

*yawn*
 
The nursery is that way little boy.

-------------------------------------------------------------->

:confused:

Nursery? Don't be childish.

It is just the same old arrogant contempt. You can only reply by implying that those who disagree are ignorant or dishonest.

Some people act in their interests some of the time. That doesn't make them a 'herd', which, I imagine you mean in this definition:

the herd, the common people; masses; rabble: He had no opinions of his own, but simply followed the herd.

How contemptuous. Why are you dishonest about your blatant contempt for your fellow man?
 
I find this contemptuous arrogance kind of terrifying.

I would if the people who engaged in it meant anything - but they're ensuring that they never will by their disgusting attitude to everyione else. Just, i suspect, how they want it. It's the same contempt the politicians and the like feel for us. Birds of feather.
 
I would if the people who engaged in it meant anything - but they're ensuring that they never will by their disgusting attitude to everyione else. Just, i suspect, how they want it. It's the same contempt the politicians and the like feel for us. Birds of feather.

Indeed. As I pointed out somewhere in this thread, it is exactly the same attitude shared with the people that they claim to be against.
 
The label seems to have originated among those in the United States of a far right political persuasion. Shortwave radio host Milton William Cooper used it commonly during his Hour of the Time radio show during the late 80s and early 90s. The Wall Street Journal first reported the label in print in 1984; the reporter heard the word used by the proprietor of an American Opinion bookstore affiliated with the John Birch Society.[1] In this usage, taxpayers were derided for their perceived blind conformity as opposed to those who thought independently.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheeple

Well well. Who would have thunked it?
 
Oh yeah we are all surrounded by beautiful free thinking people striving for a better world for all.

Don't make me laugh.

The Jehovah Trots and Seventh day Narchos make me laugh.

Too fucking funny.
 
Back
Top Bottom