What is so wrong with looking after 'ones own'??
- Thread starter durruti02
- Start date
Its old fashioned, isn't it. And it can have some fairly bad implications. If capitalism was run by a secret cartel of capitalists, then wouldn't they just act to look after their own? W/c morality has got to be a progression, and I can't see a progression in turning inwards. Not saying that it couldn't create solidarity. Its not something I care for, always thought there was something better.
So durruti/tbaldwin: when are you going to call this international conference on migration? I would have thought that ypu wouldn't spend so much time talking to "your own" about it, unless you were convinced that you had all the answers already without really thinkning about it.
treelover said:
Most of the ‘far left’, as with the trade union movement, treats disability with the briefest whisper of lip service.
Let’s see what sort of response this gets.
‘Come and join us outside Parliament for the House of Lord’s 2nd reading of the Welfare Reform Bill on 29th January.’
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
keep up squire I already did that one!MC5 said:I try to do both meself.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
really, so why does your every post consist of fact-free generalising assertions which you then twist the facts aroundtbaldwin said:
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
fuck me.tbaldwin said:
if you were any thicker you'd need daily doses of baby bio!
you FIRST come up with the fact-free generalised dumbass statements, THEN you twist facts around them. two stage process.
you CAN count to two, I trust?
Red Jezza said:fuck me.
if you were any thicker you'd need daily doses of baby bio!
you FIRST come up with the fact-free generalised dumbass statements, THEN you twist facts around them. two stage process.
you CAN count to two, I trust?
I can remember when you were less stupid.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
I can't remember when you were tbh. either refute the point properly, or leave well alone. you develop your argument by proceeding FROM and THROUGH assertions. however, these themselves need to be adduced from facts. it ain't rocket science.Lock&Light said:I can remember when you were less stupid.
Red Jezza said:
It's a fact that I don't like accusations of nazism being bandied about, and a fact that such activity doesn't much bother you.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
whaaat? have you been on the mushies? just cos I don't go into paroxysms of self-righteous indignation - not least because the poster thus arraigned is one of the planets premier cyber fuckwits - whilst simultaneously lacking the bollocks to report the post - that hardly means I'm not exercised by it! the accused can look after themselves, they are grown men not babies.Lock&Light said:
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I see from Jezza's quotes that L&L is being his usual priggishly fatuous self.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
alack soViolentPanda said:
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Red Jezza said:
Nah, just lighter fluid. What else could produce such results?
treelover said:
Treelover, anything else going on with CAWRB; apart, that is from the Parliament thing – which is great for me, as I only live a couple of miles away. I received a mailing from SA the other day; all she mentioned was the Lord’s reading of the Bill on 29th January; I got the distinct feeling she thought hers a lone voice in the wilderness – maybe it is; maybe we’ve all capitulated to the inevitability of a New Labour stitch-up; I know, I’ve considered it; have you?
tbaldwin said:
He does tend to scweam, doesn't he. And Nino too.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
tbaldwin said:
I don't think you're a nazi. You're too thick, even for that.
But you do listen to Skrewdriver and you're obsessed with immigration and the "left". I think that says rather a lot about you.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
tbh, that question needs a whole new thread on its' own, it's such a big questiondurruti02 said:
