Tory MP stabbed

[Hitchington]

No it isn't.

This is as good a dictionary definition as any: "publicly criticize (someone or something) by using ridicule, irony, or sarcasm".

If you cannot grasp the difference, I cannot help you any further.

Congratulations in copy and pasting the first definition of lampoon you Googled on the internet.

Here's another

a lampoon is more malicious, more directly aimed to insult and degrade

Do i "win" that round in Clint's War of Semantics™ ?

 

[Pale Rider]

Congratulations in copy and pasting the first definition of lampoon you Googled on the internet.

Here's another


Do i "win" that round in Clint's War of Semantics™ ?

If you cannot grasp the difference, I cannot help you any further.

 

[Deleted member 28]

Not my chosen Gov and we don't have empty supermarket shelves or fillling station queues. Also, the second lowest Covid mortality rate in the world, per 100,000 of the population. Unlike the UK. Also, you do know that there's a Police Bill going through the UK Parliament just now that bans protests and can send journalists to jail for up to 14 years?

Oh, and this little gem popped up this morning -

View attachment 103

Nice try at a distraction. The thread is about the UK, not anywhere else.

Looks like you did the right thing by leaving then, pity you can't leave the people who like living here to get on with it.

 

[mudsticks]

Looks like you did the right thing by leaving then, pity you can't leave the people who like living here to get on with it.

Quite happy to have a one time residents view, looking in from the outside.

I like living here, but I don't like what 'our' government is doing, and has done to this country.

Breaking laws, engaging in corruption, lying to the electorate, and feathering their own nests.

I especially don't like what it has done to the most vulnerable in this country.

I'm allowed to say so, I'm allowed to criticise the government, and individuals in that government.

 

[icowden]

Go and read the 'How to make friends' thread. It was discussing Angela Rayners comments about Conservatives being scum, racist blah, blah, blah. Look how many on here were agreeing with her on that thread.

Indeed and Rayners comments were of course a "generalisation". She was not addressing a specific MP, or indeed a specific group of MPs. She was addressing Conservative Party policy and behaviour. There are several hundred Tory MPs. Some of them are terrible people making appalling decisions to benefit only themselves. Some of them are very good people doing their job in a way that makes their constituents happy. Many Tory MPs don't agree with the line the Party is taking. A very few more principled MPs quit the party to become independent.

You are deliberately conflating a generalisation by a Labour MP some weeks ago with the recent death of a specific MP. By all accounts David Amess was a well respected MP, with very moderate views, and who did a *lot* of work for his community. Contrast this with say Dominic Raab who does a lot of work for himself and couldn't care less about his constituency, and you have a good overview of the spectrum of MPs within a party. The labour party is similar. From Corbyn to Starmer.

So stop being disingenuous. One can support the notion that Boris et al are scum, but also that some MPs are not (see also Rory Stewart).

 

[AuroraSaab]

Is it necessary to call anybody 'scum' though? There are plenty of words you could use to describe those you disagree with - liars, negligent, hypocrits, self-serving, vindictive, and on and on. And when people say 'This government are scum' or 'The Tories are scum', they don't add an addendum explaining who is excluded from being scum. It's pretty much accepted as a blanket description of anyone who is a Tory. (The same of course applies to derogatory terms used for Labour folk).

What does it add to the debate to use language like this? I appreciate it's mostly just venting, but calling anybody scum or Nazi is self-defeating in the long run.

 

[cookiemonster]

Looks like you did the right thing by leaving then, pity you can't leave the people who like living here to get on with it.

I actually left way before the Brexit vote and, in case you need reminding, I'm still a UK citizen. As much as that annoys you, I still have a right to comment on what's going on.

I thought you lot were against the cancel culture? This isn't the first time you've tried this.

People were getting on with it quite nicely before the racists, the stupid and the tax dodgers decided to pull the UK out of the richest trading block on Earth. For what? Happy British fish?

I see you've ignored my post about the Police Bill. Wonder why?

Oh, and I did do the right thing and I don't regret it.

 

[winjim]

The family have released a statement.

https://www.indcatholicnews.com/news/43269

We ask people to set aside their differences and show kindness and love to all. This is the only way forward. Set aside hatred and work towards togetherness.​

​

Whatever one's race, religious or political beliefs, be tolerant and try to understand.​

 

[cookiemonster]

The family have released a statement.

https://www.indcatholicnews.com/news/43269

We ask people to set aside their differences and show kindness and love to all. This is the only way forward. Set aside hatred and work towards togetherness.​

​

Whatever one's race, religious or political beliefs, be tolerant and try to understand.​

 

[mudsticks]

Is it necessary to call anybody 'scum' though? There are plenty of words you could use to describe those you disagree with - liars, negligent, hypocrits, self-serving, vindictive, and on and on. And when people say 'This government are scum' or 'The Tories are scum', they don't add an addendum explaining who is excluded from being scum. It's pretty much accepted as a blanket description of anyone who is a Tory. (The same of course applies to derogatory terms used for Labour folk).

What does it add to the debate to use language like this? I appreciate it's mostly just venting, but calling anybody scum or Nazi is self-defeating in the long run.

It's not necessarily language I would use.
Not in public discourse.

But when our current government have heaped offence upon offence in recent times.

Even enacting, or neglecting to enact policy that has led to people dying.

Then some venting, about all that at a party conference is fairly understandable reaction.

I don't know the facts of the case of course.

But somehow I doubt that a young male, radicalised in some hideously skewed interpretation of Islamic extremism is going to be taking his lead on political though from a woman in a progressive left wing party.

We do have a thread on better political discourse, so this discussion could be taken there if you like.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I doubt the man who has been arrested was influenced by Angela Raynor calling the Tories 'scum'. There is a suggestion he was influenced by Anjem Choudary's radical preaching though, which might be taken as evidence that incendiary language and villifying people does have some effect. Perhaps it might be better if everybody refrained from doing it.

 

[mudsticks]

I doubt the man who has been arrested was influenced by Angela Raynor calling the Tories 'scum'. There is a suggestion he was influenced by Anjem Choudary's radical preaching though, which might be taken as evidence that incendiary language and villifying people does have some effect. Perhaps it might be better if everybody refrained from doing it.

i think it would be great if everyone refrained from doing it.

However , in my many many years of being involved in progressive, feminist, and green orientated activities.
I've been called all kinds of very unpleasant names.

And had abuse , and threats of violence directed at me, both on, and offline.

And that's invariably been done to me, by people with rightwing mindsets.

Even our current prime minister is cheerfully on record with plenty of sexist, homophobic and racist language.

But apparently all that is discounted and ignored by the many of the electorate - because ??

Because why exactly ??

 

[AuroraSaab]

Because many people overlook stuff they don't like if the rest of the policies meet with their approval. Some people genuinely won't care about Johnson's 'sexist, homophobic, racist' language; others are prepared to overlook it because they think the Tories are currently better than the alternatives.

 

[mudsticks]

Because many people overlook stuff they don't like if the rest of the policies meet with their approval. Some people genuinely won't care about Johnson's 'sexist, homophobic, racist' language; others are prepared to overlook it because they think the Tories are currently better than the alternatives.

Yes i knew that really.

But we've got people here with their rather sudden, manufactured outrage at certain language, trying to claim that something rude that was said about the Tories at a Labour conference, is in any way related to the murder of David Amess.

Pretty unlikely really, and a rather distasteful way of trying to get some leverage too.

These are exactly the same people who will happily claim robust 'free speech' for themselves "telling it like it is" they claim.

They will routinely belittle others who object to their name calling, or slurs, or provocative language, and say we are being 'oversensitive' ' pc gone mad' 'snowflakes' or whatever.

It would appear that those people can say exactly what they like - just a bit of banter - you know like all the locker room stuff - for instance - which does have consequences - we see those consequences ..

But if we object in strong terms ??

Oh no that's not ok - We must be nice.

Same old, same old, double standard.

And I'm sick of it.

 

[BoldonLad]

i think it would be great if everyone refrained from doing it.

However , in my many many years of being involved in progressive, feminist, and green orientated activities.
I've been called all kinds of very unpleasant names.

And had abuse , and threats of violence directed at me, both on, and offline.

And that's invariably been done to me, by people with rightwing mindsets.

Even our current prime minister is cheerfully on record with plenty of sexist, homophobic and racist language.

But apparently all that is discounted and ignored by the many of the electorate - because ??

Because why exactly ??

Don't quite get this.

You think it would be great if everyone refrained from abuse, threats of violence etc

So, because you have had abuse, threats of violence etc directed at you, you feel it ok for yourself and/or others to use abuse. threats of violence etc?

Every journey starts with a single step, if no-one is willing to desist from abuse and threats, etc, then, they are not going to cease, are they?

I think I am right in saying that you have said, several times, that your views are "leftish", so, it seems reasonable to assume that those who disagree with you would be "rightish"? Not that being "to the right" (or, to the left), excuses abuse or threats of violence.

OK, let us say we agree, Boris is not setting a good example, is that a reason why we should follow that example?