Political language. What helps, what doesnt ??

[Hitchington]

Do we lower ourselves to the level of the right wing press and the yah boo politics of Tory bores shouting "calm down dear", "you big girl's blouse" from the front benches or joking about bombing the shadow chancellor in her parliamentary office? Then the term "Tory scum" fits the profile perfectly.

Or do we rise above it and criticise this awful government and the views used to defend them with our passion and vigour? And yes Pale Clint Rider, that does mean being free to hurt your feelings with insults directed at Boris "I'm a lying daffodil" Johnson, Dominic "I hate British workers" Raab and Priti Vacant Patel, to name a few.

 

[cookiemonster]

Do we lower ourselves to the level of the right wing press and the yah boo politics of Tory bores shouting "calm down dear", "you big girl's blouse" from the front benches or joking about bombing the shadow chancellor in her parliamentary office? Then the term "Tory scum" fits the profile perfectly.

Or do we rise above it and criticise this awful government and the views used to defend them with our passion and vigour? And yes Pale Clint Rider, that does mean being free to hurt your feelings with insults directed at Boris "I'm a lying daffodil" Johnson, Dominic "I hate British workers" Raab and Priti Vacant Patel, to name a few.

The latter def. The UK's being doing the former for way too long.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Name calling and hyperbolic rhetoric doesn't help.

To use the 'Nazi' thread as an example. What happened there is that FF went for shock value, he used a totally inappropriate word to describe an elected politician. Clearly she is not a Nazi, hopefully we can all agree that? However that level of language surely has no place, like Angela Rayners diatribe which was nothing more than pointless, immature, student politics.

If we are going to have robust debates, then the language of extremism surely has no place? We have all done it (although I do tend to prefer good old fashioned swear words rather than extremist language) and we all know we have done it. This thread started reasonably with this....

How can we hold our politicians to account, express our political views in such a way that our message gets across.

But in a way that everyone gets a voice, no one has to feel (or be) unsafe.

Start reigning in the language used and the way they stir up hate,

and within a page we are here....

an increasingly incompetent but powerful government with an unrepresentative vote share being able to operate their chumocracy whilst taxing the poor, their vile immigration policies, reneging on International deals and law, re-arrangement of borders to increase their votes, a leveling-up agenda which is smoke-and-mirrors for vote buying,

A party that is led by blatant liars and a PM whose language, thoughts and actions are not those of somebody who should be leading the country.

Then the term "Tory scum" fits the profile perfectly.

The question surely is more how do we stop doing it? Do we just challenge ourselves and each other, or are some people holding such entrenched views that ludicrous comparisons to 'crime families' 'Nazis' and childish memes are just inevitable?

Does someone brave start a thread to discuss a hot political potato right now, and we all debate and discuss with no insults? Do we seriously think that could even be done in here right now?

 

[Beebo]

I would like a far more honest political environment where MPs would answer questions honestly and were able to make genuine mistakes without the press hounding them.
But you can see why no one ever says sorry because every tiny mistake is jumped upon by someone.
My biggest mistake in recent years was believing that because the Brexit vote was so close, the government would seek to find a solution which would somehow reflect how close the vote was. There was no requirement for them to push through such a hard Brexit which very few people actually voted for let alone campaigned for
Similarly Trump lost the popular vote so I assumed he would seek to govern in a way that reflected that, but I was wrong again.
Politicians have to govern for the people who didn’t vote for them as well as the ones who did. But they seem to forget that bit.

 

[Xipe Totec]

Name calling and hyperbolic rhetoric doesn't help.

To use the 'Nazi' thread as an example. What happened there is that FF went for shock value, he used a totally inappropriate word to describe an elected politician. Clearly she is not a Nazi, hopefully we can all agree that? However that level of language surely has no place, like Angela Rayners diatribe which was nothing more than pointless, immature, student politics.

If we are going to have robust debates, then the language of extremism surely has no place? We have all done it (although I do tend to prefer good old fashioned swear words rather than extremist language) and we all know we have done it. This thread started reasonably with this....


and within a page we are here....





The question surely is more how do we stop doing it? Do we just challenge ourselves and each other, or are some people holding such entrenched views that ludicrous comparisons to 'crime families' 'Nazis' and childish memes are just inevitable?

Does someone brave start a thread to discuss a hot political potato right now, and we all debate and discuss with no insults? Do we seriously think that could even be done in here right now?

Perhaps instead of clutching your pearls at verifiable observations, such as those in FF's post above that you quoted, you could explain clearly and precisely how, exactly, those observations are incorrect? You've taken issues with similar statements elsewhere and not explained why - apart from articulating the clear fact that you are uncomfortable with them.

 

[Fab Foodie]

I would like a far more honest political environment where MPs would answer questions honestly and were able to make genuine mistakes without the press hounding them.
But you can see why no one ever says sorry because every tiny mistake is jumped upon by someone.
My biggest mistake in recent years was believing that because the Brexit vote was so close, the government would seek to find a solution which would somehow reflect how close the vote was. There was no requirement for them to push through such a hard Brexit which very few people actually voted for let alone campaigned for
Similarly Trump lost the popular vote so I assumed he would seek to govern in a way that reflected that, but I was wrong again.
Politicians have to govern for the people who didn’t vote for them as well as the ones who did. But they seem to forget that bit.

I think this is a very important point. Gov't do what they want regardless of the will of the people....

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Perhaps instead of clutching your pearls at verifiable observations, such as those in FF's post above that you quoted, you could explain clearly and precisely how, exactly, those observations are incorrect? You've taken issues with similar statements elsewhere and not explained why - apart from articulating the clear fact that you are uncomfortable with them.

Ok, I will try again.

It is a provable fact that Priti Patel is not a member of an organisation that ended at the of the second world war with the defeat of Hitler's Nazi Party. I think that makes that particular statement 'incorrect'. Would you agree?

In regard to the other statements, feeling uncomfortable around the constant abuse is exactly what we are talking about. If a pretty woman was walking along a road in a very short skirt and a figure hugging top with nice legs, lovely hair and a pretty face it would be accurate to say to her 'You look beautiful'. Would you do it though as that may potentially make her feel uncomfortable? My guess is you wouldn't.

Read the posts from many contributors on here about the government, they do not move the debate on, they just agree with the previous post, but try and top the abuse. How does that help?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

an organisation that ended at the of the second world war with the defeat of Hitler's Nazi Party.

While that specific party may no longer exist, it doesn't mean there aren't modern day nazis. The word could have been used in its descriptive rather than nominal form. You'd need to ask the person who used it.

 

[Xipe Totec]

Ok, I will try again.

It is a provable fact that Priti Patel is not a member of an organisation that ended at the of the second world war with the defeat of Hitler's Nazi Party. I think that makes that particular statement 'incorrect'. Would you agree?

In regard to the other statements, feeling uncomfortable around the constant abuse is exactly what we are talking about. If a pretty woman was walking along a road in a very short skirt and a figure hugging top with nice legs, lovely hair and a pretty face it would be accurate to say to her 'You look beautiful'. Would you do it though as that may potentially make her feel uncomfortable? My guess is you wouldn't.

Read the posts from many contributors on here about the government, they do not move the debate on, they just agree with the previous post, but try and top the abuse. How does that help?

You appear to have a curious definition of 'abuse'. I suspect that, should you consult a dictionary, you won't find abuse defined as 'things that are palpably factual that I don't happen to like to hear'.

I'm aware of your distress at the puntastic title of the thread concerning Ms Patel and her actions in the role of Home Secretary, however that, as I thought I made perfectly plain, was not the thread or the post to which I was referring.

So. I too, will try again. Please point out what is erroneous, abusive or otherwise unacceptable about the post you quoted above. And if, as I would be inclined to assume, you are perfectly fine with a Prime Minister who is steadfastly unapologetic about his own blatantly racist and homophobic comments, who is a provable serial liar, who breaks international law and tears up agreements he himself has signed before the ink is dry, and whose decision-making is evidently motivated by little beyond his own personal advantage - why would you have a problem with those facts being repeated?

 

[AuroraSaab]

There certainly are groups who would describe themselves as modern day Nazis. Is it reasonable to describe Priti Patel as one though? Or is it hyperbolic and maybe a bit insensitive to those who actually lived under a Nazi regime to draw such a comparison?

 

[Fab Foodie]

There certainly are groups who would describe themselves as modern day Nazis. Is it reasonable to describe Priti Patel as one though? Or is it hyperbolic and maybe a bit insensitive to those who actually lived under a Nazi regime to draw such a comparison?

Hyperbole is in the eye of the beholder....
I used the title; 'Priti Nazi' as a play on words and only very mild hyperbole. The cartoon posted and that's she's also likened to Pol Pot shows that I'm certainly not alone in that thought. I'm sure the NF would welcome her approach wholeheartedly.
Her actions and edicts w.r.t to Asylum seekers and Immigrants in particular as some kind of subhumans to be vilified and deported somewher offshore I is from the Nazi playbook and in contravention of International law, her bill to clamp-down on protests etc. is from the Nazi playbook, her banging-on about tougher policing, crackdowns on this that and the other etc. It'll soon be curfews... There's nothing Priti likes better than to talk tough and punch-down.
So whilst she may or may-not be a 'Nazi' is up for debate, but her policies have a lot of the Thirds Reich and Il Duce tendencies about them. Hell, maybe she'll at least get the trains to run on time.
People are at liberty to post why they don't think Priti Patel can be likened to a Nazi...it's still for the time being a free country.

 

[Deleted member 28]

Can't wait for your spectacularly well-informed & considered perspective on the SNP's handling of this and various other devolved issues, Champ.

Couldn't give a sh*t, I'm English.

 

[Hitchington]

The question surely is more how do we stop doing it? Do we just challenge ourselves and each other, or are some people holding such entrenched views that ludicrous comparisons to 'crime families' 'Nazis' and childish memes are just inevitable?

The "Nazi" moniker was used once, just once, in a thread title, yet you keep on mentioning it even though most of us have moved on. I get the feeling you're more upset that other people aren't as outraged as you, which is why you won't let it go.

As for stating that the government are behaving like a "dysfunctional crime family", what is so outrageous about that? Was it the "dysfunctional" bit you found upsetting?

 

[Craig the cyclist]

The "Nazi" moniker was used once, just once, in a thread title, yet you keep on mentioning it even though most of us have moved on. I get the feeling you're more upset that other people aren't as outraged as you, which is why you won't let it go.

As for stating that the government are behaving like a "dysfunctional crime family", what is so outrageous about that? Was it the "dysfunctional" bit you found upsetting?

Not at all. It's interesting that the insults and abuse towards politicians does seem to all come from the posters on the left, and not the apparently hate filled right. I wonder why that is then?

 

[Bromptonaut]

Not at all. It's interesting that the insults and abuse towards politicians does seem to all come from the posters on the left, and not the apparently hate filled right. I wonder why that is then?

Maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with the current government being of the right.

I wonder what (say) @Craig the cyclist and @Pale Rider would be saying if Dianne Abbot were in the cabinet?