BNP opens mouth, inserts foot. Again.

Does exactly what it says on the tin. Some of the nonsense contained herein may be very loosely related to The Sisters of Mercy, but I wouldn't bet your PayPal account on it. In keeping with the internet's general theme nothing written here should be taken as Gospel: over three quarters of it is utter gibberish, and most of the forum's denizens haven't spoken to another human being face-to-face for decades. Don't worry your pretty little heads about it. Above all else, remember this: You don't have to stay forever. I will understand.
Post Reply
User avatar
euphoria
Slight Overbomber
Posts: 1253
Joined: 11 Mar 2003, 19:39
Location: Berlin

markfiend wrote:And what's so wrong with socialism? Our socialised health system, while far from perfect (and the "free market" reforms foisted on it haven't helped) is far better than the insurance-driven system in the USA for example. Countries with socialist-leaning governments (Sweden, etc.) regularly top the charts in national happiness surveys.
Sorry for going at least half-OT, but being an expat-Swede living in Germany since 5 years, I have to comment on this. The Swedish health care system is much more socialist -and- far worse than the German. What the Germans complain about the Swedes would see as great progress.

I don't think there's any correlation between socialist-leaning governments and the happiness of the people - I don't even think politics at all is a major issue regarding this, unless the politics are extremely good or (more often) extremely bad.

Sorry for that, I'll crawl back underneath the rock now :wink:
User avatar
the_inescapable_truth
Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 167
Joined: 19 Dec 2008, 12:57
Location: London

I felt it necessary to bang on about free speech in order to clarify my opinion.

Sorry, but I am going to answer your questions. To answer them in any sort of comprehensive way, would require more time than I can spare at the moment. I am sure you are a big enough boy to read the multitudinous critiques of Socialism to be found on the internet.

For what it is worth though, I have heard that old canard about Sweden more times than I count, and I don't know maybe it's even true. I don't know what that means to be honest. I haven't looked into what it means to say this country is 'happiest'. I am naturally suspicious of anybody who makes such grandiose claims certainly. To make such a claim would clearly require an interdisciplinary approach, and I am not sure if this claim does so. I am definitely not one of those guys who will accept something without understanding what is means. It seems to me that any sort of life worth living is going to require a degree of unhappiness though. When we try, when we fail, when we aspire, it is only natural that a degree of unhappiness should follow. In the same way as ignorance is bliss, we can be happy where there is no freedom. But is the happiest we could be? I don't know.

Moreover, it's fair to say that Sweden hasn't anything like the problems the USA has for example. It is unnecessary for them to throw tons of money at the military. All these problems are largely a result of the way in which the society was formed more than anything. The USA really is so exceptionally different from every other country in the world it's even hard to compare it with anywhere else. I'll tell you what though. I bet it is boring living there - I'd rather live in NYC than Stockholm.

On a personal level, Socialism is just really antithetical to me, I can't seem to muster the same level of hatred against success that more Socialists seem to live by. I love success, invocation, science, and do believe people should be rewarded generously. My parents moved here with nothing, and now they have a lot. It's only through their own effort, nothing to do with the state. I wouldn't ever take dole money. I just wouldn't do it. I'd rather wallow in my own s**t. It's disrespectful to myself and those around me.
User avatar
weebleswobble
Underneath the Rock
Posts: 5875
Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 06:57
Location: The Bat-Milk Cave
Contact:

Free The Bakewell Tarts!
‎"We will wear some very loud shirts. We will wear some very wrong trousers."
User avatar
markfiend
goriller of form 3b
Posts: 21181
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
Location: st custards
Contact:

The USA doesn't need to spend so much on its military though. They have decided that they want to. As I understand it, for most of its history the USA had a non-interventionist foreign policy.

As for a choice between New York and Stockholm, well, maybe you would prefer NYC but I'm willing to bet that a homeless person wouldn't.

===

See if you're going to throw around accusations like "socialists hate success" I don't really think we can talk any more. It's about compassion for the less fortunate; if you think society can get by without compassion, well, you're a sociopath.
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
User avatar
the_inescapable_truth
Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 167
Joined: 19 Dec 2008, 12:57
Location: London

I was comparing the amount of money the USA spend on defence compared to Sweden. I thought was a rather uncontroversial point. They definitely need to spend more than Sweden. Do they need to spend more generally? Again, I don't know. I don't pretend to have the certainty you seem to about everything.

The point regarding how socialists hate success was anecdotal and mostly moot - I did say it is on a personal level that I have found this to be the case.

Socialism is well-meaning, just woefully mistaken. What starts of as helping the less fortunate, quickly turns into distributing money willy-nilly to people who make bad choices, live beyond their means, and are not willing to pick themselves up by the bootstraps. The result is a resentful, angry, and broken society. Gosh, that sounds familiar...

It's utter nonsense that, because I don't agree with this then I must some how lack compassion and be a socio-path (not to mention, a crass generalisation). I am completely in favour of helping those who genuinely deserve help, but it would be delivered by independent charities, not the nanny state.
User avatar
Quiff Boy
Herr Administrator
Posts: 16762
Joined: 25 Jan 2002, 00:00
Location: Lurking and fixing
Contact:

Image
What’s the difference between a buffalo and a bison?
User avatar
markfiend
goriller of form 3b
Posts: 21181
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
Location: st custards
Contact:

Free-market economics is well-meaning, just woefully mistaken. The free market can be seen, by simple observation of the world we live in, to be a useful fiction covering the enriching of existing vested interests at the expense of the people.

It starts with the assumption that people are perfectly rational economic actors. This is demonstrably not the case. Even if one were to grant, for the sake of argument, this assumption, there is no free-market basis for charitable giving.
the_inescapable_truth wrote:It's utter nonsense that, because I don't agree with this then I must some how lack compassion and be a socio-path
One bad turn deserves another. It is an utter nonsense that because I'm a socialist, I somehow hate success.
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
User avatar
weebleswobble
Underneath the Rock
Posts: 5875
Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 06:57
Location: The Bat-Milk Cave
Contact:

nick griffin has been complaining about being egged yesterday:



evidently the whites weren't seperated
‎"We will wear some very loud shirts. We will wear some very wrong trousers."
User avatar
stufarq
Popweazle Piddlepoop
Posts: 3209
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 17:09
Location: my own imagination

You're not taking this entirely seriously, are you weebs? :D
Any more of that and we'll be round your front door with the quick-setting whitewash and the shaved monkey.
User avatar
7anthea7
Slight Overbomber
Posts: 1134
Joined: 18 Mar 2006, 01:40
Location: beyond the event horizon
Contact:

I am so not getting into this argument...

...other than to point out that I have paid into our (US/state of WA/state of CA) social welfare system (in the form of contributions to Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, Medicare, etc withheld from my wages) for going on 40 years. I have never before been on the dole - I have always been able to find employment before that became necessary. I'm perfectly capable of living with a severe personal austerity program, and have done many times.

In the current economy, none of this has been to any avail. I (along 60 other people at my workplace) lost my job through no fault of my own, and have been unable to find anything else on which I could pay rent, buy food, and afford my ongoing medical expenses. I have exhausted my savings. I am now being forced - along with 25,00 new claimants in Washington alone - to go onto the extended emergency benefits program.

Whilst I realise you've characterised accepting accepting public assistance as 'rolling in s**t' as a personal standard, a) I still take offense to the broader implications, and b) never say 'never' - you could find yourself in the same situation as I am. (Oh, and being able to borrow off others rather than 'lowering' yourself to going on the dole does not make you somehow morally superior.)

You're entitled to your personal opinions - but you know nothing whereof you speak in this respect. :evil:
Who can begin conventional amiability the first thing in the morning?
It is the hour of savage instincts and natural tendencies.
--Elizabeth von Arnim
User avatar
markfiend
goriller of form 3b
Posts: 21181
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
Location: st custards
Contact:

Anyhoo, this is getting a bit off topic, and acrimonious (for which I'm partially to blame).

So, the BNP, bunch of cnuts, eh?
Quiff Boy wrote:Image
And you can f*ck off too ;D
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
User avatar
the_inescapable_truth
Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 167
Joined: 19 Dec 2008, 12:57
Location: London

7anthea7, I am sorry to hear of your situation (if that doesn't sound too condescending). I am perfectly aware that through no fault of our own and despite our best efforts we can end up in the rough. Honestly, I am not just a heartless bastard. You're right when I spoke of how I'd never take the dole I was referring to my own personal standard (and self-righteous as I'm sure that sounds), and I hadn't intended it to be anything more than that. I do have an opinion on why this is, and how to improve things, but yes this is a bit off-topic now.

The BNP are c**t. That we can agree on. No hard feelings and what not.
User avatar
weebleswobble
Underneath the Rock
Posts: 5875
Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 06:57
Location: The Bat-Milk Cave
Contact:

Let's all get along now



























and pick on the Welsh....
‎"We will wear some very loud shirts. We will wear some very wrong trousers."
User avatar
7anthea7
Slight Overbomber
Posts: 1134
Joined: 18 Mar 2006, 01:40
Location: beyond the event horizon
Contact:

weebleswobble wrote:Let's all get along now

and pick on the Welsh....
Nah - I think we should go back to trashing the BNP. :D

Especially after the most recent display of white supremacist behaviour in my country. :(

(Anyway, my Welsh friends would kick my arse if I started in on them... :wink: )

@ the_inescapable_truth: I'm afraid I sounded pretty hostile - my apologies for that. I've been a virtually life-long socialist primarily on a theoretical basis, but I'm now experiencing what I consider to be a strong example of the case for socialism...rather up close and personally. :|
Who can begin conventional amiability the first thing in the morning?
It is the hour of savage instincts and natural tendencies.
--Elizabeth von Arnim
DeWinter
Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 920
Joined: 16 Oct 2005, 20:57

I think what tends to annoy me is hat we've tried Socialism in this country twice, and the end result has been the same. National bankruptcy, debt, and the rise of extremists.
How more of the same is going to cure all that is beyond me.

I'd be all for a Scandinavian healthcare system in Britain. You pay for the first three G.P visits and the rest are free, the State only paying 35% of prescriptions if you're unemployed or on a low income, 20 Euros for every day in hospital, procedures free but any aftercare charged..that's the Finnish system anyway. As Finland's whole system of governence is based on "What Would Sweden Do?" I imagine it's much the same there.
I'm also fairly certain benefits are lower as well, and entitlement to them based on contributions. Schooling is entirely out of Government hands and run privately, the Government simply pays your fees. Scandinavia is no-where near as socialist as people make out ,you know. It's far less so than we currently are.
Amy party that proposed even one of those changes would be howled at as "right-wing"..
User avatar
lazarus corporation
Lord Protector
Posts: 3426
Joined: 09 May 2004, 17:42
Location: out there on a darkened road
Contact:

DeWinter wrote:I think what tends to annoy me is hat we've tried Socialism in this country twice, and the end result has been the same. National bankruptcy, debt, and the rise of extremists.
How more of the same is going to cure all that is beyond me.
We've never had a socialist system in the UK. It's been tried in Eastern Europe, but not in the UK.

Let me explain.

The solution (for the UK - I won't talk for other countries) is a balance between socialism and capitalism. I want the socialised healthcare provided by the NHS, the safety-net of a benefits system should I lose my job, and a degree of regulation of what businesses can do. I also want an environment where entrepreneurs can start new businesses and grow those businesses to provide employment for other people. It's not pure socialism or pure capitalism, but a balance between the two.

And this is what all 3 major UK parties subscribe to. Even Thatcher's government knew they couldn't get rid of the NHS, and even Callaghan's government knew they couldn't nationalise every corner shop. Where they argue is where to set the midpoint of the balance between the two.

Blair's government (and Brown's) is not socialist. If you think it is then you need to read up on what socialism is. A socialist government would not have sold off parts of the NHS into private ownership and would instead have nationalised all businesses, introduced collective farms etc. Instead the Blair/Brown government is exactly as I described all 3 main UK parties above - taking some aspects of capitalism and some of socialism, and mixing them together. And again, the balance of socialist/capitalist (and, more pertinently for this government, authoritarian/liberal) is where the argument lies.

This mix between socialism & capitalism, authoritarianism and libertarianism, is the only way to provide a working system. Any extremist who subscribes to a "pure" system (whether it be socialism, libertarianism, capitalism etc) has spent too long sitting in their bedroom alone reading political theory on dodgy websites and not experiencing real life.
User avatar
the_inescapable_truth
Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 167
Joined: 19 Dec 2008, 12:57
Location: London

Absolutely. The real world necessitates real world solutions. What is needed is a pragmatic approach that tackles things issue-by-issue. Unwavering adherence to any ideology is senseless.
User avatar
sultan2075
Overbomber
Posts: 2309
Joined: 04 Mar 2005, 19:17
Location: Washington, D. C.
Contact:

--
The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside.
User avatar
markfiend
goriller of form 3b
Posts: 21181
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
Location: st custards
Contact:

sultan2075 wrote:http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/06/18/why- ... in-europe/

Rather interesting.
Very much so. You can't really fault the analysis can you?
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
User avatar
silentNate
Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 824
Joined: 11 Jul 2007, 07:48
Location: Stars Hollow

sultan2075 wrote:http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/06/18/why- ... in-europe/

Rather interesting.
Whilst that article is fascinating stuff I couldn't help but laugh as the journalist certainly seemed to have his tongue in his cheek especially when discussing the Austrian Freedom Party :lol:
I had a face on the mirror
I had a hand on the gun
I had a place in the sun and a ticket to Syria
DeWinter
Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 920
Joined: 16 Oct 2005, 20:57

sultan2075 wrote:http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/06/18/why- ... in-europe/

Rather interesting.
Yes indeed. Bit harsh on UKIP though, they don't have any policies I'd consider particularly nationalistic.
I think there are a fair few people who have used local and Euro elections to fire a warning shot at the three main parties. I know I did. The question remains as to what I should do if they don't listen. I also hoped the humiliation would be enough to make Brown quit, but alas..
I've decided personally I can't trust Cameron to deliver where Europe is concerned. His wriggling on the Lisbon Treaty is painful to watch. The Greens want us in Europe, so I'm left with UKIP or the BNP. I'm well aware it's a rather unpleasant choice, but the others, to me, are just as bad.
I just wonder if there were people like BNP voters in the Weimar Republic saying "I'll vote for the Nazi's, they're idiots, but it'll send a message.."
User avatar
the_inescapable_truth
Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 167
Joined: 19 Dec 2008, 12:57
Location: London

User avatar
markfiend
goriller of form 3b
Posts: 21181
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 10:55
Location: st custards
Contact:

I'm not quite sure what to make of that. On the whole I'd say it's irrelevant. Address arguments to the point, not to the man.

On the other hand, the words "hoist by his own petard" spring to mind.
The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
—Bertrand Russell
DeWinter
Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 920
Joined: 16 Oct 2005, 20:57

Playing a bit loose with the definition of gypsy, to be honest. I doubt very much they were Romany. It always gets on my nerves when dredlocked gits with dodgy hygiene and a camper van get called gypsy.
And don't get me started on the yahoos with their White Lightning bottles "celebrating" the Solstice at Stonehenge..
"Vengeance. Justice. Fire and blood.."
Dark
Underneath the Rock
Posts: 6605
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 21:26
Location: People's Republic of Glasgow
Contact:

It's a loose definition, aye, but still sailing dangerously close to the BNP's own definitions.
I agree with Mark: On the one hand, it shouldn't be really relevant. On the other hand, they MAKE it relevant, and it amuses me.
Post Reply