Stop voting for fucking Tories

[ia801310]

You think the coconut racist slur is fine,

FFS, this is like groundhog day. You don't get to dictate whether the term "coconut" is racist or not in the context being discussed here. Period. That's the whole crux. You just shouting "it's racist"

doesn't make it so.

If you think calling non-white people Coconuts is acceptable, in any circumstance whatsoever, then you are a racist, end of.

If you disagree, I have a test for you, go to your place of work or any other public place and start calling non-white people Coconuts. Then kindly report back.

Until you have done that, shut up.

[_Os_]

FFS, this is like groundhog day. You don't get to dictate whether the term "coconut" is racist or not in the context being discussed here. Period. That's the whole crux. You just shouting "it's racist"

doesn't make it so.

I'm not "just shouting "it's racist"" though am I. As a South African you learn to not to do that and just keep pressing on. Over multiple posts I first defined the term coconut describing why it was racist, and then described what the political consequences of that type of thinking are in a society, with an example. To make this post in reply to me, you had to ignore my points, you also ignored my questions about the latter part of all that (the inevitable consequences if the thinking you advocate becomes entrenched). Do you think only people that aren't white can be racial traitors if they support the Tories, and within the context of an increasingly multiracial society do you think this thinking somehow won't be applied to whites if it flourishes, that they too will be racial traitors if they support a certain party?

Very funny about not thinking I knew anything about the hostile environment and the Windrush scandal also, despite actually being an African living in the UK. Then ignoring my reply there also. Have you ever completed a Windrush Scheme application for yourself or a relative, do you know what it entails? Ever been to Lunar House and told your case was all to difficult and to basically fuck off?

You're out of your depth.

[fishfoodie]

[Torquemada 1420]

You think the coconut racist slur is fine,

FFS, this is like groundhog day. You don't get to dictate whether the term "coconut" is racist or not in the context being discussed here. Period. That's the whole crux. You just shouting "it's racist"

doesn't make it so.

If you think calling non-white people Coconuts is acceptable, in any circumstance whatsoever, then you are a racist, end of.

If you disagree, I have a test for you, go to your place of work or any other public place and start calling non-white people Coconuts. Then kindly report back.

Until you have done that, shut up.

I have a tip for you. Unless you are non white, I suggest you keep your opinions of what is and what isn't racist to non white people to yourself because we actually aren't interested in your your white privilege arrogance which , like JKM would be staggering were it not oh so typical.

[Torquemada 1420]

I'm not "just shouting "it's racist"" though am I. As a South African you learn to not to do that and just keep pressing on. Over multiple posts I first defined the term coconut describing why it was racist, and then described what the political consequences of that type of thinking are in a society, with an example. To make this post in reply to me, you had to ignore my points, you also ignored my questions about the latter part of all that (the inevitable consequences if the thinking you advocate becomes entrenched). Do you think only people that aren't white can be racial traitors if they support the Tories, and within the context of an increasingly multiracial society do you think this thinking somehow won't be applied to whites if it flourishes, that they too will be racial traitors if they support a certain party?

Very funny about not thinking I knew anything about the hostile environment and the Windrush scandal also, despite actually being an African living in the UK. Then ignoring my reply there also. Have you ever completed a Windrush Scheme application for yourself or a relative, do you know what it entails? Ever been to Lunar House and told your case was all to difficult and to basically fuck off?

You're out of your depth.

I'm bored of your JKM weaseling around the subject so will distil this down to 2 simple questions. The answers are binary. YES or NO? No need for 4 paragraphs of obfuscation.

1) Is the Tory party institutionally racist?
2) Do you think you know better than coloured people (black, if you want to narrow it to this particular debate) what is and isn't racist to them?

[ia801310]

FFS, this is like groundhog day. You don't get to dictate whether the term "coconut" is racist or not in the context being discussed here. Period. That's the whole crux. You just shouting "it's racist"

doesn't make it so.

If you think calling non-white people Coconuts is acceptable, in any circumstance whatsoever, then you are a racist, end of.

If you disagree, I have a test for you, go to your place of work or any other public place and start calling non-white people Coconuts. Then kindly report back.

Until you have done that, shut up.

I have a tip for you. Unless you are non white, I suggest you keep your opinions of what is and what isn't racist to non white people to yourself because we actually aren't interested in your your white privilege arrogance which , like JKM would be staggering were it not oh so typical.

You are just a bigot.

I refuse to interact with you anymore as it is completely pointless.

If you want to know why people won't "stop voting for f**cking Tories", take a look in the mirror. You will see the answer staring at you.

I am blocking you now. I will no longer read or reply to your posts.

I hope you enjoy the rest of your life and I wish you all the best with your future endeavours.

[C69]

[Calculon]

Some black people regard the word "niggardly" as racist . Are they right? Other black people regards the term coconut as racist. Are they right?

Using the term coconut as an insult does seem to apply there is something wrong or bad about being white or "white culture".

[C69]

Interesting, I personally feel the term Welshing/Welching very offensive and racist.

[Raggs]

Interesting, I personally feel the term Welshing/Welching very offensive and racist.

I'd only ever seen it written as welching, never realised there was a link! Not a word I used anyway, so easy enough to avoid in the future!

[tabascoboy]

Well, great

[Calculon]

Interesting, I personally feel the term Welshing/Welching very offensive and racist.

That too is interesting. You could be a spokesman for the Welsh, let your fellow Welshies know what is and isn’t racist. Is there an equivalent to the term coconut when it comes to the Welsh?

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Interesting, I personally feel the term Welshing/Welching very offensive and racist.

You could start with the notion that labelling something welsh is offensive

[SaintK]

Well, great

............and of course we've just had an 8 week hiatus whilst the bastards were inspecting their navels!

[GogLais]

Some black people regard the word "niggardly" as racist . Are they right? Other black people regards the term coconut as racist. Are they right?

Using the term coconut as an insult does seem to apply there is something wrong or bad about being white or "white culture".

There’s “Dic Sion Dafydd” - a Welshman who refuses to speak his native language.

[C69]

Interesting, I personally feel the term Welshing/Welching very offensive and racist.

That too is interesting. You could be a spokesman for the Welsh, let your fellow Welshies know what is and isn’t racist. Is there an equivalent to the term coconut when it comes to the Welsh?

Not too sure of the coconut comment, however I agree that I am indeed a bellwether for Wales and all things Welsh.

[SaintK]

We all know she's much further to the right than Patel. Didn't realise she was more barking mad as well

The new home secretary has already prompted consternation among Home Office officials after telling them she wants to ban all small boats crossing the Channel, the Observer has learned.
During her inaugural address to departmental staff last Wednesday, Suella Braverman said a top priority would be stopping all Channel crossings. She has also asked all staff to watch “trashy TV” to help their “mental wellbeing”, a source said, specifically citing Channel 4’s Married at First Sight and First Dates as well as Love Island.

During her address last week, Braverman – who is expected to adopt an even more hardline agenda than Patel – also prompted widespread discontent from thousands of Home Office staff by challenging their working practices.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ ... target

[Hal Jordan]

The one thing all Tories have in common, be they black, white, Asian or Of The Night.

Always. Punch. Down.

[tabascoboy]

and quietly while news focus is elsewhere Jonathan Gullis appointed a Minister in DfE

[tabascoboy]

[Torquemada 1420]

You are just a bigot.

I refuse to interact with you anymore as it is completely pointless.

If you want to know why people won't "stop voting for f**cking Tories", take a look in the mirror. You will see the answer staring at you.

I am blocking you now. I will no longer read or reply to your posts.

I hope you enjoy the rest of your life and I wish you all the best with your future endeavours.

You are a buffoon, and I'll prove it.

Explain
a) Why millions of young blacks routinely call each other n*gger?
b) Or why this lot were, arguably, the most influential hip hop band ever? You might have to look them up because you won't hear them on Classic FM.


Presumably they are all racists? Because you, as a privileged, white middle class male would know soooooooo much better than all these people? Right?

[Torquemada 1420]

Some black people regard the word "niggardly" as racist . Are they right? Other black people regards the term coconut as racist. Are they right?

Using the term coconut as an insult does seem to apply there is something wrong or bad about being white or "white culture".

I've said this so many times now, that it really is broken record stuff.

Whether a word is racist or not depends upon a combo of intent and context. See my previous post on the use of n*gger (or derivatives). What 2 cretins on this thread seem to think is that a word can be racist absolutely. And, arrogantly, just because they say so i.e. they are the arbiters of such matters.

It's contentious whether 2 people of the same race and or culture could ever be accused of racially insulting one another (other than deliberately in jest or irony... go back to context or intent ^^^). Hence, regardless of factual accuracy about black Tories betraying their own race/culture, other blacks calling them coconuts is not racist. It simply is a non sequitur.

[ASMO]

Everyone can we please drop this now and get back to bashing the scumbag Tories.


Thanks

[SaintK]

Everyone can we please drop this now and get back to bashing the scumbag Tories.


Thanks

Quite

[sturginho]

Everyone can we please drop this now and get back to bashing the scumbag Tories.


Thanks

That's exactly the kind of thing a racist would say, you racist

[Ymx]

[Torquemada 1420]

Everyone can we please drop this now and get back to bashing the scumbag Tories.


Thanks

Especially the coconut ones.

[Torquemada 1420]

Interesting, I personally feel the term Welshing/Welching very offensive and racist.

I'd only ever seen it written as welching, never realised there was a link! Not a word I used anyway, so easy enough to avoid in the future!

FM. Who knew?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... e-notebook

I suspect most Welsh don't either.

[GogLais]

Interesting, I personally feel the term Welshing/Welching very offensive and racist.

I'd only ever seen it written as welching, never realised there was a link! Not a word I used anyway, so easy enough to avoid in the future!

FM. Who knew?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... e-notebook

I suspect most Welsh don't either.

Oh I think we do. Anyway nothing wrong with fleecing our English oppressors.

[SaintK]

Meanwhile, in the real world while Westminster is sitting on it's hands

Liz Truss’s plans for an energy price freeze and sweeping tax cuts will give Britain’s richest households twice as much financial support with living costs as the poorest households, according to a leading thinktank.

The Resolution Foundation said the prime minister’s energy package, announced hours before news of the death of the Queen last week, would come with a “colossal” price tag for taxpayers that was poorly targeted to help those most in need when combined with tax cuts promised in her leadership campaign.

It said the richest tenth of UK households would receive £4,700 in support, on average, from the government’s “energy price guarantee” and cuts to national insurance – far in excess of the £2,200 support for a typical household in the poorest tenth.

https://www.theguardian.com/busine ... upport

[GogLais]

Meanwhile, in the real world while Westminster is sitting on it's hands

Liz Truss’s plans for an energy price freeze and sweeping tax cuts will give Britain’s richest households twice as much financial support with living costs as the poorest households, according to a leading thinktank.

The Resolution Foundation said the prime minister’s energy package, announced hours before news of the death of the Queen last week, would come with a “colossal” price tag for taxpayers that was poorly targeted to help those most in need when combined with tax cuts promised in her leadership campaign.

It said the richest tenth of UK households would receive £4,700 in support, on average, from the government’s “energy price guarantee” and cuts to national insurance – far in excess of the £2,200 support for a typical household in the poorest tenth.

https://www.theguardian.com/busine ... upport

It’s ffykin diabolical that it’s across the board. I guess a single person living in a small flat could gain literally no benefit from it.’

[SaintK]

Meanwhile, in the real world while Westminster is sitting on it's hands

Liz Truss’s plans for an energy price freeze and sweeping tax cuts will give Britain’s richest households twice as much financial support with living costs as the poorest households, according to a leading thinktank.

The Resolution Foundation said the prime minister’s energy package, announced hours before news of the death of the Queen last week, would come with a “colossal” price tag for taxpayers that was poorly targeted to help those most in need when combined with tax cuts promised in her leadership campaign.

It said the richest tenth of UK households would receive £4,700 in support, on average, from the government’s “energy price guarantee” and cuts to national insurance – far in excess of the £2,200 support for a typical household in the poorest tenth.

https://www.theguardian.com/busine ... upport

It’s ffykin diabolical that it’s across the board. I guess a single person living in a small flat could gain literally no benefit from it.’

..........and!

Truss's plans to increase energy supply likely to have no impact on cutting bills before price guarantee ends, says thinktank
In her speech to MPs last week, Liz Truss said that, as well as curbing price increases this winter, she would be “ramping up [energy] supply”.

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/response- ... uarantee

[Paddington Bear]

Increasing supply not having immediate benefits is a weird criticism, given if any government had done it 5/10 years ago we wouldn’t be in the shit now

[Torquemada 1420]

Meanwhile, in the real world while Westminster is sitting on it's hands

Liz Truss’s plans for an energy price freeze and sweeping tax cuts will give Britain’s richest households twice as much financial support with living costs as the poorest households, according to a leading thinktank.

The Resolution Foundation said the prime minister’s energy package, announced hours before news of the death of the Queen last week, would come with a “colossal” price tag for taxpayers that was poorly targeted to help those most in need when combined with tax cuts promised in her leadership campaign.

It said the richest tenth of UK households would receive £4,700 in support, on average, from the government’s “energy price guarantee” and cuts to national insurance – far in excess of the £2,200 support for a typical household in the poorest tenth.

https://www.theguardian.com/busine ... upport

It’s ffykin diabolical that it’s across the board. I guess a single person living in a small flat could gain literally no benefit from it.’

And only a section of the population will be paying for this via taxes. It won't be the poor: they don't have any income to tax. It won't be the rich: they pay no taxes (thanks Tories). So guess who........?

[Torquemada 1420]

Increasing supply not having immediate benefits is a weird criticism, given if any government had done it 5/10 years ago we wouldn’t be in the shit now

a) How is she proposing to increase supply? Does she mean increase the level of stocks of things like gas? Which would not be hard since currently storage is pretty much zero.
b) And who is experiencing shortages anyway? It's not the inability to turn on a kettle but the inability to be able to pay for the boiled water.

[Paddington Bear]

Increasing supply not having immediate benefits is a weird criticism, given if any government had done it 5/10 years ago we wouldn’t be in the shit now

a) How is she proposing to increase supply? Does she mean increase the level of stocks of things like gas? Which would not be hard since currently storage is pretty much zero.
b) And who is experiencing shortages anyway? It's not the inability to turn on a kettle but the inability to be able to pay for the boiled water.

Which is inextricably linked to supply, this is not tough to grasp

[Torquemada 1420]

Increasing supply not having immediate benefits is a weird criticism, given if any government had done it 5/10 years ago we wouldn’t be in the shit now

a) How is she proposing to increase supply? Does she mean increase the level of stocks of things like gas? Which would not be hard since currently storage is pretty much zero.
b) And who is experiencing shortages anyway? It's not the inability to turn on a kettle but the inability to be able to pay for the boiled water.

Which is inextricably linked to supply, this is not tough to grasp

Errrr, no, it's not. Not as far as the UK consumer is concerned. The massive price rises are largely (before the energy cos' opportunistic, additional gouging) down to intl, wholesale supply and shortages: real, perceived or anticipated.

So unless Truss is going to magically conjure up supplies of gas independent of the global markets (i.e. home sourced from fracking, oil, whatever or source domestic alternatives such as wind), then she can only increase domestic supply by purchasing (and storing.... which is another issue because the UK doesn't have storage capacity) from the wholesale market.......... at those same inflated prices. Ergo, increasing domestic supply capacity has f**k all effect on the price.

The O Level supply demand curve is completely irrelevant here because domestic demand is inelastic and the UK has zero control over supply.

BTW, Truss going out to try and buy more gas to stockpile would actually increase the demand upon the global market and actually push prices up: although not by much since the UK is a rounding error when talking an incremental increase.

[petej]

Increasing supply not having immediate benefits is a weird criticism, given if any government had done it 5/10 years ago we wouldn’t be in the shit now

a) How is she proposing to increase supply? Does she mean increase the level of stocks of things like gas? Which would not be hard since currently storage is pretty much zero.
b) And who is experiencing shortages anyway? It's not the inability to turn on a kettle but the inability to be able to pay for the boiled water.

Thing is we would still be in the shit. As gas is an international market and we've exported loads this year. Interms of UK resilience using less by insulating would have been more effective and actually seriously cracking on with nuclear. Both of those would have been more effective than increasing domestic supply which would be neglible in global terms. Increasing domestic supply is really only good for oil and gas companies and their share holders.

[Torquemada 1420]

Increasing supply not having immediate benefits is a weird criticism, given if any government had done it 5/10 years ago we wouldn’t be in the shit now

a) How is she proposing to increase supply? Does she mean increase the level of stocks of things like gas? Which would not be hard since currently storage is pretty much zero.
b) And who is experiencing shortages anyway? It's not the inability to turn on a kettle but the inability to be able to pay for the boiled water.

Thing is we would still be in the shit. As gas is an international market and we've exported loads this year. Interms of UK resilience using less by insulating would have been more effective and actually seriously cracking on with nuclear. Both of those would have been more effective than increasing domestic supply which would be neglible in global terms. Increasing domestic supply is really only good for oil and gas companies and their share holders.

Yes. I don't think Paddington has quite grasped the difference between a closed market and an intl one.

[Tichtheid]

As Bojo the Clown goes off to lick his wounds and make his plans to regain power, it's probably worth collating some key moments from his stewardship of the office. When he tells you a year from now how he got the big calls right, try not to laugh