i'm not sure political correctness and being left politically is synonomous - consider the parody of clarkson's pained facial expression as he emphasises "how hard he tried not to say 'that word'". I think we can all agree that he is not left leaning.
Why on earth did I go and do it?
- Thread starter Fordulike
- Start date
apologies if that came across ambiguous, i am left leaning, and dont think he shoudl ahve used the word, and think immigration is, as statistics show, good
Political correctness is a form of euphemism. But like all euphemisms the word used doesn’t change the reality it just helps us to avoid facing it.
“ A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”
Or as John Lennon might have put it: One thing you can’t hide, is when you’re physically handicapped inside.
“ A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”
Or as John Lennon might have put it: One thing you can’t hide, is when you’re physically handicapped inside.
That's true, but Clarkson is a motoring hack who has no influence or relevance to the delivery of news.
The fact he's been mentioned a couple of times in this thread demonstrates the strength of his cult of personality, nothing more.
Humphrys speaks of being briefed on stories by BBC editors who gave him a copy of The Guardian and told him: "It's all in there."
The Guardian is a left leaning newspaper, but the BBC should not be following any newspaper, it should be producing its own stories in a straightforward way.
Left/right-wing and party politics is irrelevant. Corruption is not exclusive to any one segment of society and any attempt to propel this back-and-forth dynamic only furthers the obfuscation of the truth that we are ALL being shafted to benefit the tiny minority that hold any real power.
I don't know about you guys, but that the current political system does not represent, reflect or work for me in any way. What we need is real change. What we need is a REVOLUTION!
I don't know about you guys, but that the current political system does not represent, reflect or work for me in any way. What we need is real change. What we need is a REVOLUTION!
Humphries is an angry old man who’s angry because he’s an old man. The newspaper which most sets the BBC agenda is the Daily Mail. They admit themselves that they see that paper as having a feel for so called ‘middle England.’ Apart from some big stories like phone hacking which all the other papers ran away from, and the Snowdon leaks, not many Guardian type stories get covered in great detail. But a political splash in the Mail will be the lead much of the time.
Over eighty percent of the press is owned by right wing proprietors, most not domiciled here for tax purposes. They drown out the only Labour supporting paper which is the Mirror. The Guardian is politically an Orange Book Liberal paper now. It openly supports the Lib Dems, and most of its political reporters seem to be LDs. It is not at all left wing, and is mostly interested in race and gender equality issues rather than financial equality. Its main interest is in attracting affluent young middle class readers nowadays.
True for very many and has been for a very long time. The proof is in the constantly declining number who won't vote or deliberately spoil their ballot papers out of disillusionment.
On current indications the impending election may well produce the lowest ever number voting in a general election, making a mockery of the claim that we are a democracy.
.
The frustrating thing is that I see that better alternatives are possible today.
I have a vision where we combine the blockchain protocol behind the bitcoin cryptocurrency with regular (say... weekly) referendum. This would give us a completely transparent mechanism where every one of us would have our say on the day-to-day decisions that we currently elect representatives to do so on our behalf.
This is OUR true democracy.
They don't listen either.
When Lynn Faulds Wood was appointed to present the consumer program "Watchdog" in place of a male presenter, I politely pointed out that the program name should be more properly changed to "Watchbitch".
For some odd reason they preferred not to change it.
.
What the UK needs is for everyone in Scotland to vote SNP, whether we want independence or not. Both Labour and Tories are panicing about that happening. Tories have already stated they won't do a coalition with SNP and Labour don't really want to do one either. It might force Labour and Tories to actually work together for what's right instead of looking after themselves.
The Lib Dems could have done that after the last election but they were so desperate to claim to be in Government that they sided with the Tories instead of sitting in the middle.
After saying that, I'm considering voting Green party as I liked the Scottish green guy during the referendum debates.
A 100% SNP representation for Scotland and a lowest ever voting proportion in England would in combination probably be the best way to force much needed change.
.
Sounds like a certain way to break up the UK to me. Which is probably going to happen anyway in the not too distant future.
Devolution of powers to Scotland and Wales should never have been done the way it was. It should have been UK wide devolution like in Germany with Westminster as the federal government.
We've already voted up here to not break up the UK. What will break it up is if things don't change. If the referendum was held again next week the vote would probably go the other way.
What the Westminster lot and Labour in particular should ask is, WHY?
Totally agreed John, either no devolution or done properly the federated way. What we did was the inevitable result of creating a compromise to satisfy both opinions on the desirability of devolution.
.