Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Infiltrated by the far right, in plain sight. And the geriatric Taliban lap it up, presumably because 'brown people'.

https://bracknell.laboursites.org/2023/ ... candidate/

Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Sat Apr 08, 2023 2:59 pm Infiltrated by the far right, in plain sight. And the geriatric Taliban lap it up, presumably because 'brown people'.

https://bracknell.laboursites.org/2023/ ... candidate/

Ex-BNP is one thing but Britain First is another level altogether.

Desperate Dan’s not keen on descendants of plantation owners having to dip into their pockets. So he’s giving a Marxist liberationist perspective a spin.

And how was that money made? Under the magnificent Capitalist system all that sugar grew, harvested and refined itself, obvs.

Capitalist mass production fuelled industrial level slave trading, simple causation Dan draws attention to by denying the link. Its really a Mark Steel spoof.

>hint<
Hannan is dim.

Youngian wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 11:38 am Capitalist mass production fuelled industrial level slave trading, simple causation Dan draws attention to by denying the link. Its really a Mark Steel spoof.

A brief review of the timeline will demonstrate that the triangular trade pre-dates the work of Watt and Arkwright by at least a century.

Hannan is a complete twat, thick as pigshit and harder to flush than a Boxing Day turd. However, in this case he is just parroting, uncritically and without any evidence of thought, what (40-50 years ago) was a standard line in history courses. The revisionist critique in which the importance of slavery was established and emphasised was a feature of the 1970s.

Labour is the second factor of production.
Any reduction in costs of production increases profits.
Profit maximisation is what drives Capitalism.
It's as simple as that.

Sugar, cotton, tobacco etc could all be produced profitably without the use of slaves but, the Capitalist argues, why would I settle for less profit when I could have more?

Circle the wagons to save the Moggster.

Clever political thought? Rees-Mogg's policy of scrapping EU law all at once is being, er, scrapped as we speak.

Some sensible people think Hannan has a point here. Though the paper Smith is quoting actually ends with "Marx was right".

3.5% sounds like a number plucked fresh out of the tweetist's arse.

It’s in the research paper he quotes. It doesn’t sound very much but the paper argues that it was.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Mon Apr 10, 2023 8:56 pm It’s in the research paper he quotes. It doesn’t sound very much but the paper argues that it was.

I'm aware of the way conservative influences use research papers..

For example: "Dr Andrew Wakefield is brave enough to break consensus and tell us DA TROOF".

An old trick that's been used for every lost cause from lead in cider, tobacco, lead(again)ed petrol, climate change, fast food and very recently GROWTH!!


Citing no evidence is a clear sign of spouting made up shit.
Citing just one paper or author is frequently a sign of collusion to make shit up.

"Experts [or worse, 'boffins'] say..."

I've heard a few broadcasters (mostly DJs and the 'soft' end of the spectrum but hey) saying that academics just write papers for the attention. More like that news agencies cherry pick academic papers for wacky factoids and easy leads for filler items, while the arts & humanities majors reinforce the image of anyone in STEM as Sheldon Cooper, Wilf Lunn, or Josef Mengele.

From the 'Mandrake' column at the New European:

"Whatever else modern Conservatives are about, it isn’t about conserving anything, so it stands to reason the party’s own name – in use for almost 200 years – may now be about to be thrown into the dustbin of history.

I hear extraordinary whispers that Isaac Levido – currently advising Rishi Sunak on strategy for the next election – is conscious how toxic the word “Conservative” has become and is toying with names that have more nationalistic resonance, such as the Patriotic Party, to replace it.

There was a far right party of that name that ran in the 1964 general election – it eventually threw in its lot with the National Front – but that’s unlikely to put Levido off the idea. The party faithful may well have their own thoughts about this, but all the same Levido seems to be paving the way towards it, with Theresa May, Liz Truss and Boris Johnson all dropping the word Conservative from their social media bios. Dominic Raab, Alok Sharma, Sajid Javid, Tom Tugendhat and a large number of other MPs formerly known as Conservatives have followed suit. Michael Fabricant now describes himself somewhat comically as a “socially liberal MP”.

How about "The Nazi Party"?

Abernathy wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 12:30 pm How about "The Nazi Party"?

That's SOCIALIST!!!!!

Abernathy wrote: ↑Tue Apr 11, 2023 12:30 pm How about "The Nazi Party"?

Are you saying they're socialists?