Polarisation of society

Oreo

Fleurpepper and anyone else who says/thinks that Palestinian leaders shouldn't have to compromise are right but they will have to, as will Israel in the end for a lasting peace between them.Diplomacy not guns will win the day eventually just as it did in NI.

Israel was given land- taken from another people. That was accepted, somehow. But since then Israelis have done nothing but take more, and more, and some more, and subjugate the natives to the most cruel and disgusting violations and humiliations.

Casdon

Glorianny

Those who think there is some sort of orchestrated media attack on Starmer should look again. There is so much which could be used against him but isn't. His shifting alliances and his honesty for example. His treatment of left wing Jews. The people asking the questions and raising the issues are members or former members of the party. And anyone who really cares about democracy and government should be grateful to them. Because no matter how much you want a Labour government you have to question if an individual who lies, who acts undemocratically, who seems to have no moral compass, is the sort of person this country needs as PM.

Orchestrated media attacks are part of politics though Glorianny, they move from one target to another, build people up and knock them down in the blink of an eye. The attacks from the left of Labour, and the attacks from the right wing media are all with the same aim, to bring him down. If it wasn’t Starmer it would be the next Labour leader (or anybody who isn’t Boris in some media lenses). That’s just how it works. There isn’t one truth about him, or about anybody else, and people have to make up their own minds. Speaking for myself, the more dubious stories I hear the less I believe them, there’s a real danger of crap overload so that if there actually is a really serious concern about his probity it will be missed in all the Peter Crying Wolf stories.

So what "dubious" stories are you speaking of Casdon?
I can give you a list of facts about Starmer that show his duplicity. Here's some of them
1. He served under Corbyn's leadership and apparently endorsed the policies he stood for. (You never see that mentioned in the press)
2.When he became leader he promised to unite the party, he has since castigated and banned left wing organisation's within the party.
3. He has forced left wing Jews to leave the party. This letter details the worries some Jews have about his actions policymogul.com/key-updates/13485/-large-and-growing-number-of-jewish-members-of-labour-party-suspended-or-investigated-over-antisemitism-
4 He has banned Jeremy Corbyn from standing as a Labour candidate, something that should be the decision of the local party. (and yet he was once a supporter)
I can post more if you need them.
These are not dubious stories. But any such you have seen in the press I would be interested to know about.

Glorianny

Casdon

Glorianny

Those who think there is some sort of orchestrated media attack on Starmer should look again. There is so much which could be used against him but isn't. His shifting alliances and his honesty for example. His treatment of left wing Jews. The people asking the questions and raising the issues are members or former members of the party. And anyone who really cares about democracy and government should be grateful to them. Because no matter how much you want a Labour government you have to question if an individual who lies, who acts undemocratically, who seems to have no moral compass, is the sort of person this country needs as PM.

Orchestrated media attacks are part of politics though Glorianny, they move from one target to another, build people up and knock them down in the blink of an eye. The attacks from the left of Labour, and the attacks from the right wing media are all with the same aim, to bring him down. If it wasn’t Starmer it would be the next Labour leader (or anybody who isn’t Boris in some media lenses). That’s just how it works. There isn’t one truth about him, or about anybody else, and people have to make up their own minds. Speaking for myself, the more dubious stories I hear the less I believe them, there’s a real danger of crap overload so that if there actually is a really serious concern about his probity it will be missed in all the Peter Crying Wolf stories.

So what "dubious" stories are you speaking of Casdon?
I can give you a list of facts about Starmer that show his duplicity. Here's some of them
1. He served under Corbyn's leadership and apparently endorsed the policies he stood for. (You never see that mentioned in the press)
2.When he became leader he promised to unite the party, he has since castigated and banned left wing organisation's within the party.
3. He has forced left wing Jews to leave the party. This letter details the worries some Jews have about his actions policymogul.com/key-updates/13485/-large-and-growing-number-of-jewish-members-of-labour-party-suspended-or-investigated-over-antisemitism-
4 He has banned Jeremy Corbyn from standing as a Labour candidate, something that should be the decision of the local party. (and yet he was once a supporter)
I can post more if you need them.
These are not dubious stories. But any such you have seen in the press I would be interested to know about.

I don’t see the issues you mentioned as anything other than a pragmatic leader taking control of the party Glorianny. Supporting somebody else’s policies is what all politicians do, in public at least although I’m sure they don’t necessarily do so in private. When they become leader they re-evaluate, and as they learn more, they keep on doing that. Look at the changes in the current government as just one example of that happening. You call it disloyalty, others call it pragmatism to get the party elected. Corbyn has to go, of that there is absolutely no doubt.
We’ll never agree on these issues, because we don’t see the route to achieving a fairer society through the same lens although the end result of the two ways of getting there may be similar.

Glorianny

Oreo

Fleurpepper and anyone else who says/thinks that Palestinian leaders shouldn't have to compromise are right but they will have to, as will Israel in the end for a lasting peace between them.Diplomacy not guns will win the day eventually just as it did in NI.

Diplomacy only worked in NI because you had outside influences pushing heavily at both sides of those involved in the conflict to compromise. No one is pushing Israel to compromise and in fact the country is becoming more aggressive and imposing more restrictions on Palestinians. NI was in any case just the tail end of British interference in Ireland. A lot of bloodshed was involved going back centuries. If Israel/Palestine takes the same time to develop a solution you might see peace in 500 years.

True.It may take hundreds of years or never happen.Israel being the more powerful country, surrounded as it sees it by enemies.
Even so, it could end through diplomatic means eventually.
Palestine won’t get what it wants through any other means.

Casdon

I haven’t made any jibes, as you put it, at Tony Blair. I’ve commented before on a thread asking who members believed was the worst PM. I believe Thatcher and Blair were pretty much equal so stop being so disingenuous. I don’t believe you were laughing at his disastrous invasion of Iraq just being your usual sarcastic self towards me. You have form in that regard.

You say you have a good memory; I have an excellent one.

Casdon
There are plenty of facts about Starmer and his deceitfulness. Martin Forde The Forde Report commissioned by Starmer. Forde completed the report with very many recommendations to deal with the hierarchy of racism in Starmers party. Starmer didn't reply Forde spoke on video saying this. There is conflating antizionism with antisemitism so if you support Palestine you are considered anti semitic And Jews have been expelled. The anti democracy with people of North Islington not allowed to choose Corbyn who is well liked and respected constituency MP. Young Labour and associates debating the erosion of democracy in Labour. Lots if videos with KS saying one thing and then saying the exact opposite He is a proven liar. It's importation to people that the many good polices like nationalisation NHS not privatisation, utilities public ownership, Taxing the richest starmer hasn't got the answers and people are disappointed.

This thread was originally about the polarisation of our society by it has morphed into a thread about the polarisation of factions within the Labour Party.

If ever we needed a united Labour Party after the poisonous governments we have endured since 2015, it is now.

What is wrong with you people?.

Do you actually want our appallingly undemocratic FPTP electoral system to keep delivering Tory governments at every election ad nauseam?

The problem may be that electoral systems are hard to understand. We need some clever advertisements in the media

Revealed: royals took more than £1bn income from controversial estates
Investigation reveals King Charles and the late queen’s income from duchies grew sixteenfold during Elizabeth’s reign

Rob Evans, Felicity Lawrence and David Pegg
Wed 5 Apr 2023 13.00 BST
King Charles and the late Queen Elizabeth II have received payments equivalent to more than £1bn from two land and property estates that are at the centre of a centuries-old debate over whether their profits should be given to the public instead.

An investigation by the Guardian has established the full scale of income extracted by the royals from the duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, which run giant portfolios of land and property across England.

The duchies operate as professionally run real estate empires that manage swathes of farmland, hotels, medieval castles, offices, shops and some of London’s prime luxury real estate. They also have substantial investment portfolios, but pay no corporation tax or capital gains tax.

From Guardian

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2023/apr/05/revealed-royals-took-more-than-1bn-income-from-controversial-estates-king-charles-queen-duchies-cornwall-lancaster

Yes I think it great that Obama such a high profile person has spoken out about Murdock and the polarisation of society. Not enough has been said about the press and in our country its mostly propaganda a few billionaires owning the newspapers, don't pay tax here, thats the way they want it to stay. What happened to the press standards enquiry and where is good journalism? Polarisation happens when newspapers and media don't represent the people nor speak truth to power. Do the press have a mainly one sided view of monarchy sycophantic coverage no dissenting views same with politics. There is a demonstration at York today of Charles visit wonder if it will be covered in media.

Grany whether the King's visit to York will be in the papers will depend on whether the paper thinks the visit will interest its readers. Newspapers have to publish material that interests potential readers, otherwise they will not buy it.

In the UK we have a range of newspapers that cover the full range of political opinion from The Guardian and i on the left to the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail on the right and a series of sensationalist papers like The Sun and star.

it is always the fond belief of those on the left that everyone would think like them, if only they were properly indoctrinated and only allowed to see news sources that those on the left approved of.

John Cleese in an interview a while back said he is disappointment that both proportional representation and the second phase of the Leveson inquiry into press standards had been “kicked out by rightwing governments”, adding: “I just thought to myself: ‘Right I’ll just give up and try somewhere else.’”

Saying his “particular beef” was with newspapers, Cleese showed Newsnight presenter Emily Maitlis figures from an EU report that claimed the UK had the lowest level of trust in the printed media. That's not surprising.

I wonder if York visit by royals covered of demonstration

How the British royal family hides its wealth from public scrutiny
Ahead of the coronation of King Charles III, the Guardian’s Cost of the crown series exposes the entrenched secrecy around the royal family’s money and wealth

M0nica

Grany whether the King's visit to York will be in the papers will depend on whether the paper thinks the visit will interest its readers. Newspapers have to publish material that interests potential readers, otherwise they will not buy it.

In the UK we have a range of newspapers that cover the full range of political opinion from The Guardian and i on the left to the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail on the right and a series of sensationalist papers like The Sun and star.

it is always the fond belief of those on the left that everyone would think like them, if only they were properly indoctrinated and only allowed to see news sources that those on the left approved of.

You do know that the victory of Tony Blair was attributed by many to the Sun newspaper changing sides and backing him , don't you? Their headline"It's the Sun wot won it" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_The_Sun_Wot_Won_It#:~:text=The%20phrase%20was%20used%20again,
No one on the left wants to indoctrinate anybody, but recognising the power of the media and its undoubtedly biased views is important. Even those on the right should realise that.

Glorianny

M0nica

Grany whether the King's visit to York will be in the papers will depend on whether the paper thinks the visit will interest its readers. Newspapers have to publish material that interests potential readers, otherwise they will not buy it.

In the UK we have a range of newspapers that cover the full range of political opinion from The Guardian and i on the left to the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail on the right and a series of sensationalist papers like The Sun and star.

it is always the fond belief of those on the left that everyone would think like them, if only they were properly indoctrinated and only allowed to see news sources that those on the left approved of.

You do know that the victory of Tony Blair was attributed by many to the Sun newspaper changing sides and backing him , don't you? Their headline"It's the Sun wot won it" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_The_Sun_Wot_Won_It#:~:text=The%20phrase%20was%20used%20again,
No one on the left wants to indoctrinate anybody, but recognising the power of the media and its undoubtedly biased views is important. Even those on the right should realise that.

The left are as guilty of trying to indoctrinate as any other section of society Glorianny. You only need to read this thread to see that!

Talking about the biased views of media important to know appreciate, anyone can have right left or centre views and express them her.

Casdon

Glorianny

M0nica

Grany whether the King's visit to York will be in the papers will depend on whether the paper thinks the visit will interest its readers. Newspapers have to publish material that interests potential readers, otherwise they will not buy it.

In the UK we have a range of newspapers that cover the full range of political opinion from The Guardian and i on the left to the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail on the right and a series of sensationalist papers like The Sun and star.

it is always the fond belief of those on the left that everyone would think like them, if only they were properly indoctrinated and only allowed to see news sources that those on the left approved of.

You do know that the victory of Tony Blair was attributed by many to the Sun newspaper changing sides and backing him , don't you? Their headline"It's the Sun wot won it" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_The_Sun_Wot_Won_It#:~:text=The%20phrase%20was%20used%20again,
No one on the left wants to indoctrinate anybody, but recognising the power of the media and its undoubtedly biased views is important. Even those on the right should realise that.

The left are as guilty of trying to indoctrinate as any other section of society Glorianny. You only need to read this thread to see that!

If you can post anything I have said that is pure propaganda please do so Casdon. I don't see posting truths that are not in the mainstream media as "indoctrination". Sadly some people will say things which they are unable to substantiate, and will then blame others, because truths they have no wish to acknowledge, are revealed to them. But that isn't indoctrination. It is simply presenting an argument which others are quite free to contest if they have evidence that proves me wrong.

It is a sad state of affairs when someone on the left can't post their views without being accused of indoctrination whilst the mainstream media consistently promotes right wing ideas without censure.

I didn’t say the left were doing something that mainstream media wasn’t Glorianny, but that all side/sources do it?
We all use sources to attempt to prove our point, none of them are 100% reliable because they come from a source which isn’t.

Sorry Casdon facts are facts. Usually for mine I check more than 1 source What you construe from those facts may be different. Someone may try to present the facts in a way which influences your thinking.
But presenting those facts is not indoctrination

Glorianny

Sorry Casdon facts are facts. Usually for mine I check more than 1 source What you construe from those facts may be different. Someone may try to present the facts in a way which influences your thinking.
But presenting those facts is not indoctrination

I agree that facts are facts, particularly when gathered from a number of sources with different leanings/funding/motivation, but we all construe from them different conclusions don’t we? Indoctrination comes from portraying selected facts in a specific light to persuade other people that your interpretation of those, often multiple and conflicting pieces of information is the only logical way of interpreting them.

Casdon here's one of the facts I posted about Starmer. I don't think I have drawn or construed any conclusions. I've left you to come to your own.
3. He has forced left wing Jews to leave the party. This letter details the worries some Jews have about his actions policymogul.com/key-updates/13485/-large-and-growing-number-of-jewish-members-of-labour-party-suspended-or-investigated-over-antisemitism-
I could draw all sorts of conclusions from that fact but I haven't.

Glorianny

Casdon here's one of the facts I posted about Starmer. I don't think I have drawn or construed any conclusions. I've left you to come to your own.
3. He has forced left wing Jews to leave the party. This letter details the worries some Jews have about his actions policymogul.com/key-updates/13485/-large-and-growing-number-of-jewish-members-of-labour-party-suspended-or-investigated-over-antisemitism-
I could draw all sorts of conclusions from that fact but I haven't.

You could draw all sorts of conclusions from that information, of course, and everybody will. It’s just that the conclusions will all be different based on what else people know, how they interpret the implementation of the recommendations of the review, and their pre existing beliefs. Not everybody feels the same way about the rights of Jews, Palestinians or in fact the wider Middle East political questions, do they? Not all Jews feel the same way either. In addition, not everybody thinks that this is a central issue for the UK Labour Party, so they don’t care much about that element of the debate. It’s a circuitous discussion.

I’ve asked before, and the question I still have is whether this thread is the place for these issues to be discussed, why don’t people start specific thread about issues they want to discuss rather than hijack other threads? It was a seemingly random post on this thread that started this discussion, which has strayed a long way now from the original post.

Here here Casdon

Casdon

Glorianny

Casdon here's one of the facts I posted about Starmer. I don't think I have drawn or construed any conclusions. I've left you to come to your own.
3. He has forced left wing Jews to leave the party. This letter details the worries some Jews have about his actions policymogul.com/key-updates/13485/-large-and-growing-number-of-jewish-members-of-labour-party-suspended-or-investigated-over-antisemitism-
I could draw all sorts of conclusions from that fact but I haven't.

You could draw all sorts of conclusions from that information, of course, and everybody will. It’s just that the conclusions will all be different based on what else people know, how they interpret the implementation of the recommendations of the review, and their pre existing beliefs. Not everybody feels the same way about the rights of Jews, Palestinians or in fact the wider Middle East political questions, do they? Not all Jews feel the same way either. In addition, not everybody thinks that this is a central issue for the UK Labour Party, so they don’t care much about that element of the debate. It’s a circuitous discussion.

I’ve asked before, and the question I still have is whether this thread is the place for these issues to be discussed, why don’t people start specific thread about issues they want to discuss rather than hijack other threads? It was a seemingly random post on this thread that started this discussion, which has strayed a long way now from the original post.

You accused me of "indoctrinating" people. But as you say everyone can make their own minds up, so no indoctrination.

If you don't like the way a thread is developing there is one sure way to stop it. Stop replying to posts.