|
|
Post by felonious on Feb 27, 2024 12:29:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 27, 2024 12:38:58 GMT
Needs to be a full investigation into the military as it seems alot of these extremists are coming from military background.
When members of the military with access to arms are allowed to carry out threats like this towards MPs and don't get sacked then it sets an awful precedent. If there's no criminal charges for those with access to guns then it's no wonder people think they can get away with this.
Luckily not seen anything of that extent for a few years now. Although DUP leader did receive a death threat last month from right wing loyalists too.
|
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Feb 27, 2024 12:51:04 GMT
One of the first principles of populist strategy: “ They gain power and maintain intense support by polarizing society. They divide society into an “us” and a “them,” creating or hardening preexisting divides to constantly pit a more authentic “people” against enemies.” carnegieendowment.org/2023/06/13/how-does-business-fare-under-populism-pub-89908Sounds like the vast majority of politicians on both sides of the aisle. It was pushed forwards by Corbyn, loved by Johnson and further embraced by Braverman and Sunak. Couple that with increased poverty, high inflation and politicians who are never actually in Parliament and you have a powderkeg. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 27, 2024 12:58:10 GMT
One of the first principles of populist strategy: “ They gain power and maintain intense support by polarizing society. They divide society into an “us” and a “them,” creating or hardening preexisting divides to constantly pit a more authentic “people” against enemies.” carnegieendowment.org/2023/06/13/how-does-business-fare-under-populism-pub-89908Sounds like the vast majority of politicians on both sides of the aisle. It was pushed forwards by Corbyn, loved by Johnson and further embraced by Braverman and Sunak. Couple that with increased poverty, high inflation and politicians who are never actually in Parliament and you have a powderkeg. Civil, How do you deal with the scenario in which some people might believe in the populist position/ policy/ point of view because they believe in the populist position/ policy/ point of view ? |
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Feb 27, 2024 13:12:25 GMT
One of the first principles of populist strategy: “ They gain power and maintain intense support by polarizing society. They divide society into an “us” and a “them,” creating or hardening preexisting divides to constantly pit a more authentic “people” against enemies.” carnegieendowment.org/2023/06/13/how-does-business-fare-under-populism-pub-89908Sounds like the vast majority of politicians on both sides of the aisle. It was pushed forwards by Corbyn, loved by Johnson and further embraced by Braverman and Sunak. Couple that with increased poverty, high inflation and politicians who are never actually in Parliament and you have a powderkeg. Civil, How do you deal with the scenario in which some people might believe in the populist position/ policy/ point of view because they believe in the populist position/ policy/ point of view ? I don’t think that you have to make a campaign about “us versus them”. I’ve never felt that is a good way to bring a society together. Populist use that because it’s easier to say why you shouldn’t vote for someone than it is to say why you should vote for them. I think that it’s a huge reason why society feels more and more fractious. Populists occur on both the right and left side. It’s a style choice. |
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 27, 2024 13:13:00 GMT
Here's an example of a "threat".
May as well make a thread about the threat to Stoke FC players while we're at it if this is what we consider life threatening these days. I read worse after a stoke city loss.
|
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 27, 2024 13:21:40 GMT
The current level of threats from MPs  People should be able to go about and do their job without intimidation, hopefully the perpetrators will be arrested and do time. |
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 27, 2024 13:25:03 GMT
Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with your point a lot of it stems from learned behaviour and incitement Some of the main provocateurs of this are MPs themselves, of all Party's, inside and outside the House and the extensive reporting of their comments in MSM There are a small number of MPs who use this Populist divisive tactics, I don't have to name them. I would have thought that all of the incidents you linked could be prosecuted under the Public Order Act. If required an amendment to have an exclusion zone around MPs houses similar to Abortion Clinics could be considered. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 27, 2024 13:26:45 GMT
Civil, How do you deal with the scenario in which some people might believe in the populist position/ policy/ point of view because they believe in the populist position/ policy/ point of view ? I don’t think that you have to make a campaign about “us versus them”. I’ve never felt that is a good way to bring a society together. Populist use that because it’s easier to say why you shouldn’t vote for someone than it is to say why you should vote for them. I think that it’s a huge reason why society feels more and more fractious. Populists occur on both the right and left side. It’s a style choice. It seems to me that " populism " in the populist use of the term largely referred to right of centre groups, is a mildly derogatory, disparaging term and is associated with things such as : dog whistling".....is this another thing I've got wrong then?? |
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Feb 27, 2024 13:29:10 GMT
Here's an example of a "threat". May as well make a thread about the threat to Stoke FC players while we're at it if this is what we consider life threatening these days. I read worse after a stoke city loss. As soon as I read "I shagged your mum" the threat level dropped about 10 notches  |
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Feb 27, 2024 13:57:30 GMT
I don’t think that you have to make a campaign about “us versus them”. I’ve never felt that is a good way to bring a society together. Populist use that because it’s easier to say why you shouldn’t vote for someone than it is to say why you should vote for them. I think that it’s a huge reason why society feels more and more fractious. Populists occur on both the right and left side. It’s a style choice. It seems to me that " populism " in the populist use of the term largely referred to right of centre groups, is a mildly derogatory, disparaging term and is associated with things such as : dog whistling".....is this another thing I've got wrong then?? Venezuela had a populist govt under Chavez. They were decidedly left wing. In fact, for many years populism was a left wing concept that was observed mostly in South America. One of the chief concepts of populism is to develop the “us versus them” strategy in campaigning, which is divisive by design. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 27, 2024 14:01:57 GMT
Whilst I obviously don't condone MP's being harassed at their homes, I don't think this is particularly anything new is it? If you decide to be an MP, then you've always known that this sort of stuff comes with the territory.
Hell it was far, far worse in the 80's, where it was part of an MP's daily routine to check under their cars for bombs, before turning the ignition key, I don't remember this sort of intimidation putting quality candidates off from standing.
After the Brighton bomb, Thatcher didn't complain of intimidation, she dusted herself down and went back to work the very next day, off the top of my head, I can think of at least four MP's who were murdered in the 80's alone.
And just look at the incendiary rhetoric we've had from Braverman, Jenrick, Scully and Anderson this week, all deliberately meant to be inflammatory and all meant to be divisive, if they want to turn down the dial on the verbal abuse that some of them are receiving, then maybe they might like to consider the language and discourse that some of their colleagues are using as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Feb 27, 2024 14:12:35 GMT
It seems to me that " populism " in the populist use of the term largely referred to right of centre groups, is a mildly derogatory, disparaging term and is associated with things such as : dog whistling".....is this another thing I've got wrong then?? Venezuela had a populist govt under Chavez. They were decidedly left wing. In fact, for many years populism was a left wing concept that was observed mostly in South America. One of the chief concepts of populism is to develop the “ us versus them” strategy in campaigning, which is divisive by design. Was about to post similar. You could add Bernie Saunders, Jeremy Corbyn and Pablo Inglesuas although with limited electoral success The common themes they embraced were anti-capitalism, social justice, pacifism and anti-globalization. Couldn't agree more with what the Strategy is. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 27, 2024 14:18:30 GMT
It seems to me that " populism " in the populist use of the term largely referred to right of centre groups, is a mildly derogatory, disparaging term and is associated with things such as : dog whistling".....is this another thing I've got wrong then?? Venezuela had a populist govt under Chavez. They were decidedly left wing. In fact, for many years populism was a left wing concept that was observed mostly in South America. One of the chief concepts of populism is to develop the “us versus them” strategy in campaigning, which is divisive by design. Good. So there is no value judgement on populism , the term just means what is popular in the eyes of the electorate. Thanks for that Civil |
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Feb 27, 2024 15:01:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 27, 2024 15:20:24 GMT
Wouldn't say their lives were under threat or risk from that video though. Difference between having your safety at risk and being deeply unpopular for running the country into the ground and being complicit with genocide. MPs have to face their electorate and be accountable to them for their decisions. Some politicians want to have their pie and eat it and it just doesn't work like that. The finger pointing at 34 seconds made me laugh 🤣🤣🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Feb 27, 2024 15:40:39 GMT
Wouldn't say their lives were under threat or risk from that video though. Difference between having your safety at risk and being deeply unpopular for running the country into the ground and being complicit with genocide. MPs have to face their electorate and be accountable to them for their decisions. Some politicians want to have their pie and eat it and it just doesn't work like that. The finger pointing at 34 seconds made me laugh 🤣🤣🤣"Take eet like a man" |
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Feb 27, 2024 15:47:17 GMT
Wouldn't say their lives were under threat or risk from that video though. Difference between having your safety at risk and being deeply unpopular for running the country into the ground and being complicit with genocide. MPs have to face their electorate and be accountable to them for their decisions. Some politicians want to have their pie and eat it and it just doesn't work like that. The finger pointing at 34 seconds made me laugh 🤣🤣🤣 I think it was a curry they were eating, not a pie. Unless they were on a Wrights Chicken tikka pasty. |
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Feb 27, 2024 17:24:24 GMT
The rule of the mob..... Staffordshire PCC Ben Adams, who was hosting the event, said: "I would like to thank Staffordshire Police for their very rapid and thorough work following the protests seen in Stoke-on-Trent this weekend. "It is vital that our democratic process is protected, and lawful, peaceful protest is a valid part of that. "The use of intimidation and abuse, in an attempt to disrupt and undermine the democratic process, is unacceptable and will not be tolerated." Newcastle-under-Lyme MP Aaron Bell was due to attend the fundraising event but said he was advised by police not to do so. “I appreciate that the force was stretched across multiple incidents on Friday night, and I am grateful for them protecting everyone’s safety, but for a fundraising dinner to be cancelled by the mob is an infringement of the democratic process which cannot and should not be tolerated," he said. He said any intimidation of politicians was "beyond unacceptable”. Police say they are continuing to review CCTV footage and speak to individuals who were present. www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czd7dgk738do |
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Feb 28, 2024 6:51:42 GMT
Here's an example of a "threat". May as well make a thread about the threat to Stoke FC players while we're at it if this is what we consider life threatening these days. I read worse after a stoke city loss. The video I’d consider very concerning from what the poster’s saying in it. If he wants to shout his bile he needs to be accountable for it regardless of who or what politician he’s threatening. There’s a couple of things that need considering. - Who the poster is and whether he’s a threat in relation to carrying out what he’s saying. - He’s clearly committing a criminal offence (telecommunications). If the police do nothing re what’s said and he carries out his threats the media quite rightly would be furious that it’d been allowed to happen and no action was taken in respect to what he’d said. If people want to shout their mouth off and be abusive / make threats on social media they need to be accountable. Threatening people who ever they are should never be normalised. |
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Feb 28, 2024 8:02:45 GMT
MPs facing threats to their safety will get extra security, as part of a £31m package to help protect the UK's democratic processes from disruption, the government has announced. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has also raised concerns about MPs being "verbally threatened and physically, violently targeted" in recent weeks, with "legitimate protests hijacked by extremists". www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68419987 |
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Feb 28, 2024 8:10:04 GMT
In an interview with Lindsay Hoyle that was re-screened this morning, it was quite striking how casual he was when mentioning a death threat he'd had 'last Friday', it was as though it was a common occurrence.
According to the report MP's don't see 'flag wavers' as anything like as dangerous as 'lone wolves'.
|
|
|
|
Post by professorplump on Feb 28, 2024 8:11:50 GMT
I am genuinely concerned about the election campaign. I fear there will be violence.
|
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 28, 2024 9:25:09 GMT
I am genuinely concerned about the election campaign. I fear there will be violence. Huddys gonna take over Westminster and say the election was stolen if sunak doesn't get a second term. If the culture wars ramp up further it could be concerning. Hopefully not but you never know. |
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Feb 28, 2024 9:29:29 GMT
Whilst I obviously don't condone MP's being harassed at their homes, I don't think this is particularly anything new is it? If you decide to be an MP, then you've always known that this sort of stuff comes with the territory.
Hell it was far, far worse in the 80's, where it was part of an MP's daily routine to check under their cars for bombs, before turning the ignition key, I don't remember this sort of intimidation putting quality candidates off from standing.
After the Brighton bomb, Thatcher didn't complain of intimidation, she dusted herself down and went back to work the very next day, off the top of my head, I can think of at least four MP's who were murdered in the 80's alone.
And just look at the incendiary rhetoric we've had from Braverman, Jenrick, Scully and Anderson this week, all deliberately meant to be inflammatory and all meant to be divisive, if they want to turn down the dial on the verbal abuse that some of them are receiving, then maybe they might like to consider the language and discourse that some of their colleagues are using as well.
i notice you only mention the tories there .
I think that starmer, and khan are equally as bad .
both sides are playing the racist cards at the moment. tories re anti semitic labour and liebour about islamist tories.
just putting things into perspective considering its an election year.
|
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Feb 28, 2024 9:39:59 GMT
Here's an example of a "threat". May as well make a thread about the threat to Stoke FC players while we're at it if this is what we consider life threatening these days. I read worse after a stoke city loss. The video I’d consider very concerning from what the poster’s saying in it. If he wants to shout his bile he needs to be accountable for it regardless of who or what politician he’s threatening. There’s a couple of things that need considering. - Who the poster is and whether he’s a threat in relation to carrying out what he’s saying. - He’s clearly committing a criminal offence (telecommunications). If the police do nothing re what’s said and he carries out his threats the media quite rightly would be furious that it’d been allowed to happen and no action was taken in respect to what he’d said. If people want to shout their mouth off and be abusive / make threats on social media they need to be accountable. Threatening people who ever they are should never be normalised. You raise good points mate but all you need to do is look on twitter, YouTube or Facebook under any footballer, celebrity, politician or influencer and this stuff is quite common though like you say shouldn't be normalised. Unfortunately our police are stretched as it is and the anonymity which the internet provides makes it very easy for people to behave like this. Again it shouldn't be normalised but it also shouldn't be dramatised either. I'd argue men with arms shooting pictures of living politicians is more of a threat than that video. Yet those individuals who did that are all still in a job with access to live ammunition and weapons. |
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Feb 28, 2024 9:54:42 GMT
Words have consequences and there are many MP's constantly stirring up hatred and creating a culture war. MP'S should not be using the words that the man on the street use, they should be more professional than that. People who say it's refreshing to hear politicians say it as it is don't really care for the consequences unless it affects them but the truth is they are putting us all at risk. They are responsible for many people getting attacked because of their beliefs. Religions and communities are being turned against eachother rather than being brought together. The threat levels for the public will rise because of MP's turning people against eachother but I doubt they will do too much to protect the public from potential terror attacks in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Feb 28, 2024 10:21:03 GMT
Words have consequences and there are many MP's constantly stirring up hatred and creating a culture war. MP'S should not be using the words that the man on the street use, they should be more professional than that. People who say it's refreshing to hear politicians say it as it is don't really care for the consequences unless it affects them but the truth is they are putting us all at risk. They are responsible for many people getting attacked because of their beliefs. Religions and communities are being turned against eachother rather than being brought together. The threat levels for the public will rise because of MP's turning people against eachother but I doubt they will do too much to protect the public from potential terror attacks in the future. Well said and again it’s widespread and from all political parties. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Feb 28, 2024 11:46:33 GMT
Whilst I obviously don't condone MP's being harassed at their homes, I don't think this is particularly anything new is it? If you decide to be an MP, then you've always known that this sort of stuff comes with the territory.
Hell it was far, far worse in the 80's, where it was part of an MP's daily routine to check under their cars for bombs, before turning the ignition key, I don't remember this sort of intimidation putting quality candidates off from standing.
After the Brighton bomb, Thatcher didn't complain of intimidation, she dusted herself down and went back to work the very next day, off the top of my head, I can think of at least four MP's who were murdered in the 80's alone.
And just look at the incendiary rhetoric we've had from Braverman, Jenrick, Scully and Anderson this week, all deliberately meant to be inflammatory and all meant to be divisive, if they want to turn down the dial on the verbal abuse that some of them are receiving, then maybe they might like to consider the language and discourse that some of their colleagues are using as well.
i notice you only mention the tories there .
I think that starmer, and khan are equally as bad .
both sides are playing the racist cards at the moment. tories re anti semitic labour and liebour about islamist tories.
just putting things into perspective considering its an election year.
Which specific comments are you referring to Phil? I'm more than happy to link the ones from the four I've mentioned above if you need me to. |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Feb 28, 2024 12:08:13 GMT
Wouldn't say their lives were under threat or risk from that video though. Difference between having your safety at risk and being deeply unpopular for running the country into the ground and being complicit with genocide. MPs have to face their electorate and be accountable to them for their decisions. Some politicians want to have their pie and eat it and it just doesn't work like that. The finger pointing at 34 seconds made me laugh 🤣🤣🤣 They shouldn't have someone coming in and shouting at them in an aggressive manner and being pointed at etc, they should face their electorate in a respectful way, and was that protest applied for and legal? It was for a fundraiser for the Police, fire and crime commissioner, yet gets labelled as an anti-zionist fundraiser, which can cause feelings of hate and raise tensions, he should be arrested and charged with slander and behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace and rioting. Edit - 4 were arrested A small group of attendees left the restaurant by a back door, and had eggs thrown at them by one of the demonstrators. Attendees also said their family members, including children, were subjected to verbal abuse. |
|
