Author Topic: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock  (Read 410 times)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« on: 27 May 2021 11:55AM »
Put simply they would defend Hitler.

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5133
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #1 on: 03 Jun 2021 11:58PM »
I agree. 

I'm going to say some yucky stuff but then what I cling onto as hope.

in my opinion, Hitlers rarely start out as full-blown hitlers, they build up and tip over into it.  I think that had Thatcher not had certain of her ministers holding her back, she might have gone from being what she was like to being what her friend Pinochet was like.

And even people remembered through history for leading struggles for peace and fairness have ended up doing very nasty things.  You have to be a strong person with a strong team behind you to achieve change, and as the time-worn saying goes, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Our culture favours goody versus baddy narratives.  So we can make a thing of Nazis murdering 6 million Jews but find every excuse under the sun for turning away offers of humanitarian food aid from our allies that could have prevented most of the 3 million Bengalis, subjects of our King's empire, from starving to death.  "Oh, but they've had famines before" people say.  The history of Bengal famines under royal-chartered Honourable East India company, then British 'presidency' (province) it is rather similar to the Irish hunger.

We want to think of Nazis as foreign, nothing like us.  Hmm, would that be why the Nazis got most of their eugenics ideas from the British?  Still, at least under the Nuernberg Laws, you'd escape being murdered if three out of your four grandparents were Nazi-defined Aryan, after Hitler rejected adopting the American 'one drop' concept.  Not that that one drop of 'colour' would get you murdered, of course.  Well, unless you were lynched or happened to be somewhere like Tulsa on the wrong day.

I actually think that to get into power in a human world, you generally need to be very strong and rather hard-nosed, which pushes you close the edge of nastiness even if you didn't start out that way.

But...

Many's the country, society etc. that's pulled back from the edge.  Not perfectly, not without there still being suffering, but nevertheless not tipped over into total nastiness.

And if we can't stop things getting pretty nasty, we can do what we can to help one another, which happens a lot already.  E.g. foodbanks.  They shouldn't be needed, but they're there.
« Last Edit: 04 Jun 2021 12:06AM by Sunny Clouds »
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #2 on: 06 Jun 2021 09:30AM »
"I'm an obsessive problem-solver"  You are indeed Sunny, you solved in your posting my dilemma as to how to expand what I meant by my very brief opening remark.

I was reacting to some of those brown nosing Tories who were so obviously so far up Johnson's backside they had blinded themselves to the damage that utter idiot was doing. I feel these people, like those in the upper reaches of the Nazi party in 1930's Germany, have but one driving ambition get position/power and once gained do anything and everything not to lose it even if it means harming others in doing so.

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5133
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #3 on: 06 Jun 2021 05:30PM »
I find some senior Tories very scary.

In relation to my views on change, I think that my sense that people can change, which may mean backing off from views once held or intensifying them, means that I don't just look at how nasty any are now, but consider how nasty they might be.

As for harming others, I'm minded of the infamous experiment in which participants were supposedly 'teaching' someone in another room with an audio link, that other person being an actor, and being encouraged to give the person electric shocks if they didn't do as required.  The actor expressed more and more pain and distress.  But it was, from the participants' perspective, ok, because it was part of a proper, authorised experiment.

Then I switch my mind to that research after WW2, where people involved in the holocaust were interviewed.  A German soldier who shot Jewish children when their families were being moved to concentration camps justified it on the basis that if he hadn't shot them, what they'd have suffered would have been far worse.

And rich people justify what they do.  Look at all their wonderful philanthropy.   Whilst people argue over the likes of Colston and the slavery aspect, let's consider an aspect that is, I believe, classic of so many rich philanthropists now - paying ordinary workers poor wages to work in poor conditions, then feeling good about providing the facilities the philanthropist thinks they should have.

And politicians?  Yes, be a patron of a good cause or two.  But don't spend much money on it unless you get a kick out of doing so, otherwise, what's the point in being a politician? 

I conceptualise most of the powerful people in our world as being compulsive hoarders of wealth and/or power (and of course, the two enmesh).

When we envisage compulsive hoarders, it's in the context usually of a documentary of a small house or maybe a flat full of rubbish, including a kitchen that probably makes a lot of viewers recoil.  Well, it's a rare maker of a documentary about compulsive hoarding that shows a tidy house.

But consider this - there's many a person, particularly but not only middle class, with a house large enough to accommodate wall upon wall covered in bookcases full of books they're never going to read again.  But maybe there are lots of complete sets of whatever.  And the kitchen?  Well it doesn't look cluttered because it's large with loads of cupboards and maybe a walk-in utility room and/or pantry.  You can spread the same amount of clutter round a room and it looks ok or not depending on the size of the room and the furniture.  100 pieces of unwashed crockery laid out neatly out on a dining table, a kitchen table and a food preparation counter look like nothing.  In a small place, a quarter or less of that can make you look like you're surrounded by clutter.  Yet the supposedly neatly laid out stuff might have been there for ages, or not need to be there etc.

You can hoard power that way. Who sees it as hoarding if you do it tidily?
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

bulekingfisher

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3080
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #4 on: 12 Jun 2021 07:06PM »
Hello JH2

If the Torie's are fighting among est them self it will not be long before Labour are fighting amongst as they seem to copy each other  them self's (~lack of creative thought) so I might vote GREEN we have to break out of tit for tat

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5133
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #5 on: 13 Jun 2021 01:18PM »
Labour has been fighting internally for ages.  Labour left vs Labour right.  I wish Labour could manage what I think of as an internal coalition.  (My personal politics are, very roughly, half way between what I, displaying my personal bias, call blue Labour, i.e. New Labour, and those at the Communist end of the spectrum, and I'd be very happy to vote Green if I thought my local Green candidate stood a chance of being voted in.)

I really could do with finding people to debate politics with.  You can see that when I get going, I post long screeds.  I miss debating with Se├ín on the phone.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #6 on: 14 Jun 2021 09:09AM »
I have memories of when Cameron was leading the opposition for the Tories and was all concerned to promise things being better for the disabled of the country and for me it felt awkward as I have a strong dislike of the Tory Party. As time passed I found my dislike of the Tories to be well founded as once having gain power Cameron and his fellow Tories rapidly developed selective amnesia and dumped all their concerns for the country's disabled, especially any who might be claiming welfare benefits.

I think there's something of a grass is greener tint to things when the party of government are making life more difficult than it need be for us. There will be many here who will recall in the run up to an election, where Labour were looking to regain power, their would be DWP minister was telling the cameras all about how they would be harder on benefit claimants, Reeves I think was the woman I mind most in one interview on the telly.

Here in Scotland Labour allowed itself to take Scottish voters for granted and this saw the SNP begin to gain on them as many, seeing the ignoring of various circumstances by Labour governments here in Scotland, began to understand just how little the people of Scotland mattered to Labour beyond gaining a majority in Westminster. In effect it all comes down to both these main political parties being about themselves and not much else.

Many MPs once elected would sacrifice their granny to hold on to the financial support of their Party as it is this support and that of the Party's election machine that provides the security of a best hope of re-election come future general elections. Just imagine a general election without the Party logos being allowed on leaflets and the like, where candidates had to stand up and declare what they believe in and personally stand for. To stand for election on the strength of their character and argument and not because of family, party or union money support.

Maybe it's because of my getting on in my years that I'm becoming more and more intolerant of those in Westminster, including the Speaker of the House, but were I given the chance I'd introduce either a large calibre hand gun to the chamber with the understanding that any minister at the dispatch box who fails to answer the question asked is shot on the spot and the next in line called up to answer the same question. The result I'm sure would see the question asked being answered at the first time of it being asked. I know that is of course totally a non starter and perhaps not a bit too daft, my other suggestion would be for their to be attached to the dispatch box two electrical poles, one live the other negative, and which the minister at the box is compelled to hold, one in each hand, and made aware that should s/he fail to answer the question asked, try to deflect or distract from said question be given a short shock through these poles.

It is simple answer the question asked and there will be no need for any shocks being administered, sure we might not like the answer but so long as it is an answer to the question we asked we can live with that.
« Last Edit: 14 Jun 2021 10:30AM by JLR2 »

oldtone27

  • Charter Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2976
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #7 on: 14 Jun 2021 10:12AM »
I have sympathy for your aim to obtain an actual answer from Ministers, but my problem is who is the arbiter of the answer, Who holds the gun or the shock switch?

How do we know what the answer should be? Perhaps every voter should be given a Like/Dislike button and if more people hit Dislike then the shock is administered.

A sort of nationwide poll/kangaroo court depending on your point of view.

JLR2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #8 on: 14 Jun 2021 10:39AM »
For me it would be for the Speaker of the House to administer the shock, a mild one (at first) Lindsay Hoyle is less likely to be of sufficient strength of character to such control on the House but were John Berclow still the House's speaker I'd expect the electric bill for Westminster to double :f_laugh:

I feel it is all too obvious, especially in Johnson's case, when questions are not being addressed and answered but it's not only those watching Westminster that's seeing this country's parliament fraudulently claiming to be anything of a democracy even Europe is witnessing it as they learn that there is now, if there ever was, no good reason to trust anything a British politician says.
« Last Edit: 14 Jun 2021 08:25PM by JLR2 »

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5133
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #9 on: 14 Jun 2021 05:05PM »
I find it interesting but sad to see how the UK and those running it look through the eyes of other countries' media.

I was watching a Wion news report earlier today, about police and government handling of demonstrations, particularly by women.  It showed clips of Kill the Bill demos, with police officers using shield edges to hit women with, and police officers dragging a woman off, her trousers pulled down as they grabbed her, and carrying her away with her undies covering very little.

The report mentioned someone in the UK parliament mentioning some sort of democracy issue in another country whilst that same parliament is taking away more and more of our democracy.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)

Sunny Clouds

  • Charter Member
  • Super Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5133
Re: Tory MPs defending Johnson and Hancock
« Reply #10 on: 14 Jun 2021 05:08PM »
As regards speakers, I wish Bercow hadn't been largely limited to shouting "Order!" in his distinctive, drawn out style.  I wish that just once, maybe on his last day as speaker, he could have shouted "Liar!" in the same tone.

If I thought I could work out which country to go to and would be accepted there, I'd think of emigrating.  I wish my Irish antecedents were recent enough to get me an Irish passport.  No, Ireland's not perfect, but right now it seems less scary.
(I'm an obsessive problem-solver, so feel free to ignore any suggestions or solutions I offer, even if they sound terribly insistent.)