Politics Thread 6

Fed up talking videogames? Why?

Who will you vote for at the next General Election?

Conservative
10
9%
Labour
44
39%
Liberal Democrat
26
23%
Green
19
17%
SNP
8
7%
Brexit Party
1
1%
UKIP
1
1%
Plaid Cymru
1
1%
DUP
0
No votes
Sinn Fein
2
2%
The Independent Group for Change
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 112
User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by <]:^D » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:18 pm

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/to-save-black-lives-police-top-brass-must-face-reality

Very interesting opinion piece on the spectator.


i almost stopped reading at this point
Together with an experienced colleague, she will approach a pair of known street criminals to ask them what they are doing in a particular location.


1. we know quite well that this happens to people who are not known criminals, but just black and young
2. even if they were known criminals, this is hardly top-level sleuthing, its just bad policing.

i read the rest of it, its nonsense: it employs the hand-wringing 'wont someone think of the youth violence" to justify other racial tactics that are glossed over or ignored in the article. the incidents of having to take down photos etc. is annoying if true, but policing a borough or area is more than just locking people up, police need to serve the community. i think this article is written from the perspective of someone 'doing' policing to an area rather than for it.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:32 pm

<]:^D wrote:i think this article is written from the perspective of someone 'doing' policing to an area rather than for it.


Perfectly put.

The man who wrote that article was previously involved in controversy for this:

A police chief who wanted to "batter and break the legs" of a man convicted of a stabbing has defended his remarks.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-35793654

Image
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Hexx » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:43 pm

Hexx wrote:Ignore RotS. He's become the forum's staunchest defender of institutiional racism. You won't reach him


It's hard being right so often.

User avatar
Snowcannon
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: New York

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Snowcannon » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:44 pm

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:Very interesting opinion piece on the spectator.


An oxymoron if I ever saw one

User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Hexx » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:56 pm



Quite satisfying - until you remember none of the will move against party etc so it's ultimately meaningless :cry:

Dual
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Dual » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:15 pm

Wtf is Parler?

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:16 pm

Dual wrote:Wtf is Parler?


You wouldn't get it.

Image
User avatar
Karl_
Nyaaaaaaa~!
Nyaaaaaaa~!
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Karl_ » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:18 pm

Dual wrote:Wtf is Parler?

Alternative to Twitter for the far-right weirdos that get banned off it.

User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Hexx » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:18 pm

Dual wrote:Wtf is Parler?


It's the place loads of right wing shitbags who get banned for hate speech/inciting violence from Twitter have gone for "free speech"

User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Northampton

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Return_of_the_STAR » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:44 pm

Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:
Knoyleo wrote:Seriously though, knife crime in London disproportionately affects those living in the cities poorest areas. Tourists/visitors are perfectly safe.


Indeed it is. However those areas are increasingly becoming no go zones for ‘outsiders’.


You sound about 2 posts away from turning to a Fox News style "London's Islamic no go zones!"


At what point have I made reference to race or religion in relation to knife crime? Don't be a Hexx.


You seem to miss the point quite often. I wasn't saying you were being racist or Islamophobic, I was commenting on your "no go zones!" hyperbole.


Is it hyperbole? I don't think so. There are areas in my town that I 100% would not walk down or visit on my own.

I actually think as it was my point, it's you that is missing it.


You being scared of areas of your town doesn't negate my point.


You not being scared of areas in your town doesn’t negate my point either.


It really does. Your claim is that there are no go zones. It turns out they are just areas you are personally scared of.

Being afraid of something is not the same as there actually being a serious danger.

What town are we taking about btw?


No I said increasingly becoming no go zones. I was referencing the rapid deterioration of certain areas.

User avatar
Return_of_the_STAR
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Northampton

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Return_of_the_STAR » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:48 pm

Moggy wrote:
Return_of_the_STAR wrote:https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/to-save-black-lives-police-top-brass-must-face-reality

Very interesting opinion piece on the spectator.


It's very interesting to see the people online backing Kevin Hurley, that'd give me pause before posting anything by him.

Also, The Spectator :dread:

I read the article. It appears to come down to an argument that "black people think the police are racist, the police are not racist, the police react to black people thinking they're racist".

The police are a truly marvellous organisation, according to the police themselves (and countless far right pundits) they have no problem with racism at all. Extraordinary to imagine just how perfect they all must be.


I don’t actually read the spectator by the way. This was shared on Facebook.

We’ve discussed the grouping of all police as a single entity as though they are a person before and clearly disagree so I won’t go into that any further.

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:04 pm



This is true. The rules in the Communist Manifesto are:

1. Kill capitalists

2. Wash hands before getting married

3. No kissing

4. Wash hands after getting married

5. ????

6. Profit

Image
User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Lex-Man » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:07 pm

Moggy wrote:

This is true. The rules in the Communist Manifesto are:

1. Kill capitalists

2. Wash hands before getting married

3. No kissing

4. Wash hands after getting married

5. ????

6. Profit


Surely profit is the last thing communists want to make.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Oblomov Boblomov » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:08 pm

Seize only the means of production, never your wife's bum!

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:08 pm

Lex-Man wrote:
Moggy wrote:

This is true. The rules in the Communist Manifesto are:

1. Kill capitalists

2. Wash hands before getting married

3. No kissing

4. Wash hands after getting married

5. ????

6. Profit


Surely profit is the last thing communists want to make.


Image

Image
User avatar
KK
Moderator
Joined in 2008
Location: Botswana
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by KK » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:15 pm

I don’t know if this has been mentioned already the last few pages, but considering how vocal Stig Abell has been on the Sky News paper reviews of Boris Johnson, he half gave him an easy ride on the debuting Times Radio. You can’t slag him off for months and then when you finally get the bloke in front of you throw soft balls. He may then refuse to come on again because he finds the questioning too tough (Radio 4) but at least you conducted at least 1 worthwhile interview rather than 5 interviews of fluff. Otherwise you may as well just watch Boris be interviewed by Holly Willabooby on This Morning or The One Show.

Image
User avatar
Karl_
Nyaaaaaaa~!
Nyaaaaaaa~!
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Karl_ » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:16 pm

Moggy wrote:

This is true. The rules in the Communist Manifesto are:

1. Kill capitalists

2. Wash hands before getting married

3. No kissing

4. Wash hands after getting married

5. ????

6. Profit


"It is only through washing our hands at weddings that capitalism can be destroyed." - Karl Marx

"It is the duty of every Communist to bring about revolution via health and safety regulations." - Vladimir Lenin

"Kissing when you've got germs on you in a pandemic: this is another kind of liberalism." - Chairman Mao

Say what you want, they were truly visionaries.

User avatar
Lex-Man
Member
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Lex-Man » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:18 pm

Moggy wrote:
Lex-Man wrote:
Moggy wrote:

This is true. The rules in the Communist Manifesto are:

1. Kill capitalists

2. Wash hands before getting married

3. No kissing

4. Wash hands after getting married

5. ????

6. Profit


Surely profit is the last thing communists want to make.


Image


I got the joke, it's a slashdot joke.

Amusement under late capitalism is the prolongation of work.
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Moggy » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:25 pm

Lex-Man wrote:slashdot


Image

Image
User avatar
Igor
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Not telling...

PostRe: Politics Thread 6
by Igor » Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:22 pm

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:We’ve discussed the grouping of all police as a single entity as though they are a person before and clearly disagree so I won’t go into that any further.


Speaking about the police service as a single entity is the only useful way of discussing the police as a concept within our society, I think. I've already mentioned why I feel ACAB is a valid statement; you entrust the police to enforce the law and the moment one of them is not held accountable, the rest of them are tainted.

I also think it's pointless speaking about individual police officers because it actually doesn't matter if there are zero racist police officers; in its current form and operation, the police force and its policies would still be racist.

There's an interesting phenomenon in statistics called Simpson's paradox. It occurs when a trend appears in several different data sets that then disappears or reverses when the sets are combined. So for example, you might be testing two different treatments for kidney stones; treatment A seems to be more effective than treatment B against small kidney stones, and treatment A also seems to be more effective than treatment B against large kidney stones, and yet as soon as you combine your data set, it's clear that treatment B is the better overall treatment.

Another example I just made up, goalkeeper A has a better penalty save percentage than goalkeeper B against left-footed penalty takers, and right-footed penalty takers, and yet when the dominant foot of the penalty taker is ignored, goalkeeper B has a better overall save percentage.

It's reasonable to expect there are police officers that are not racist who work with other officers that are also not racist, and those officers might understandably be confused when someone calls their organisation racist. The interesting thing is, you don't need there to be any racist police officers for systemic racism to exist within the police force. Much like the Simpson's paradox, we might get one trend when we look at the individuals but an opposing trend when we look at the collective. We very much like to see everyone as an individual, treat everyone on their own merits. We fail to see how those individuals might interact and miss the change in trend.

Black households are the most likely group to have an annual household income of less than £20,800, at 35%. Just 19% of black households have an annual income of more than £52,000 against the UK average of 27%. Lower incomes mean the black population need to congregate where there are jobs and available housing, which means cities, which means over 98% of the black community in the UK live in urban centres. A dense population suffering from high income inequality has, to my knowledge, never not led to higher incidence of crime. So those areas are policed more. And the people in those areas are associated with the crimes being committed. BAME population in the UK is just under 14%, yet they make up 26% of the prison population and over 50% of the youth offender population.

None of this requires a cabal of secretly racist cops. It doesn't require any racist cops at all. It's all just a natural consequence of rampaging income disparity. So it doesn't matter if you're not racist - if you're not racist, then you are not the problem. It doesn't matter if most police officers are not racist because the problem isn't racist police officers. Remove all racist police officers and BAME people will still make up a disproportionate share of the prison population because they will still be involved in more crime because they will still be clustered in urban centres because they will still be in the lowest income brackets because minorities always fall to the bottom. Until the issue of income inequality is fixed, this will always be a problem in our modern society and it's going to get worse.


Return to “Stuff”