if hes not trying to oppress people who cares

The people close to him. People interested in the impact of religion on society. People interested in philosophy in general.

I mean, come on, "who cares?" is a pretty innocuous thing to say on a forum. I didn't indicate that I was intending to all fedora-tipper on him and send him links of Christopher Hitchens. . . Or do anything for that matter.

Just found this on leddit:

Motherfucker listen up!

You have a job that I would seriously consider killing someone for. I'm in my late thirties, ok, I've spent my entire life working on what I could find with a high school education, and it hasn't been pretty. I've never, ever, made above 30,000 dollars a year (gross, not net), and have spent the last TWENTY years working any job I could find that had hours that would let me attend school too. This meant 7p-7a shifts at a factory doing shit work breathing in toxic fumes, it meant 10 plus years as a waiter, cleaning up other peoples dirty napkins, their fucking silverware with all their nasty hand germs all over them, burning my fucking hands so many times on hot plates that the nerves on my palms and fingers are fucking useless, acting nice to the patrons when I wanted to scream at the top of my lungs when they would drop more on one dinner than I'd spend on groceries in a month, then stiffed me because the special request they had made wasn't to their taste. I fucking worked so many shit jobs to get myself to a place where I could earn a decent living, and now I read some story about some bitch who can't deal with a number. Fuck you. I have a record. You know what that means? It means that I spent the last twenty fucking years of my life getting my shit together just so I can hear employers tell me no thanks. I fucking graduated college last week as a practically middle aged man. Yeah, huge hiring potential, they love the forty year olds with exactly zero days of professional experience!

You fucking listen to me. You spent a couple hundred grand on school. Good for you! The reason that shit costs so much is because it's fucking professional currency. You need to remember that you have that in your arsenal now. Go out and find a better job if 56k isn't enough, but for fuck's sake, quit using the word hopeless. There're no fucking limits to the money you can make. Use your brain. You are so far ahead of where I'll ever be, and I'm fucking offended that you aren't aware of how good You have it. If you are hopeless, what fucking chance do I ever have at happiness. You have something so valuable, it's hard to quantify just how valuable it is. You have innocence. My record is out there for anyone with an internet connection to see. I'm a Fucking outcast, a pariah.
I have debt too, yo. Loads of it. Fuck debt.

Debt is a number. It does not define you. It does not own you. It does not control you.

Now, saddle up.

Eh, I didn't realize that post would be so long. Apologies and props to you if you read through all of it.

Thing is though, the Tories aren't actually gunning to leave the ECHR. They just want British courts to have primacy in interpreting it.

This could be a very bad idea, especially for a country stereotyped as being a nanny state. I would not be happy about this.

How is trying to achieve greater national sovereignty to curtail the rights of those largely deemed undesirable getting closer to a "nanny state"? Especially under the Tories.

I'm pretty sure that the right to respect for family life had nothing to do wit hthe Qatada case.

Thought I read it in the FT article, but apparently not. Can't fucking remember where I got that from.

I wouldn't celebrate until we get to read the replacement, this could either be a good thing (i.e, bye bye captain hook you scummy shit) or something less enjoyable. With the baboon at the helm, I don't have much optimism. With any luck the retard will be too inept to do anything and will leave it up to subordinates.

As much as its fun to bash the Tories, or politicians in general, I highly doubt they're going to eviscerate our rights and start building gulags in the West Midlands.

no turkey

stop

youre turning me into a statist shill

Why do you supper scrapping the right to sue for unfair dismissal?

That's the only one I can see there being a legitimate problem with, but I can't comment further without reading the legislation we'll eventually see.

On the face of it, there certainly needs to be a change in the law; there is no presumption of innocence for the accused. I'm not sure I'm totally down with it being completely scrapped though. We'll have to look when it's in writing.

Financial Times.
The Independent.
The BBC.

This guy is my representative, I'm glad to say. We've had a look at some of Sajid Javid's coming reforms:
- Deregulation of the labour market.
- Scrapping the right to sue for unfair dismissal.
- Allowing companies with less than 10 employees fire anybody at will with a pay-off.
- And requiring public service unions in healthcare, transport, the fire service and education to have at least 50pc member turnout with 40pc support when calling strikes.

I can gladly say I pretty much support all of these.

I'm perpetually on the verge of losing my shit:

i don't think it takes much brilliance to figure out that the basic needs of life (food, clothing, and shelter) shouldn't be commodified, let alone sold for so much, that only the most privileged can have any access to the highest qualities of them

It takes more brilliance than any collection of intellectuals has to figure our production, distribution, pricing and a whole host of other things. I mean, just think about how a house is made. It isn't just a construction team rolling up and propping up a couple of bricks; fuck, just think of a pencil:


Supply and demand is the most efficient pricing mechanism precisely because it encompasses more information than any one individual, or group of individuals, could realistically collate and manipulate. It is, as far as it matters, completely autonomous and reactive. It does nothing but reflect the general desires of society. Granted, consumers are fucking idiots, but government regulation like restrictive intellectual property laws and safety regulations hold much more sway over the development of important drugs.

Obligatory videos:

?

Probably Dustin.

BBC

Seventeen people have been arrested in an unplanned protest outside Downing Street following the Conservatives' election victory, the Met police say.

Protesters waved banners with anti-austerity slogans and placards calling for proportional representation as police in riot gear looked on.

The police said four officers and a staff member were injured.

A police investigation is under way after graffiti, referring to "Tory scum" was daubed on a war memorial.
The Women's War Memorial in Whitehall, unveiled in 2005 by the Queen, is yards from where a concert to commemorate the 70th anniversary of VE Day was taking place.

Seventeen different sets of clothing and uniforms are sculpted around the sides of the bronze monument to symbolise the hundreds of different jobs women undertook in wartime and then gave back for homecoming men at the end of the war.

A Downing Street spokesman said: "Spraying graffiti on war memorials is a despicable display of disrespect for those who fought and died for their country, particularly at a time when the whole nation comes together to commemorate the 70th anniversary of VE Day."

In a statement, the Met said the arrests were made for a variety of offences, including violent disorder and assault on police.

It added that one officer had dislocated a shoulder and a staff member had been hit in the mouth by an object. Both were being treated in hospital. Three other officers were assaulted but did not go to hospital, the Met said.
There have been no reported injuries to any protesters.

In Cardiff, about 200 people joined a similar rally against austerity cuts, where singer Charlotte Church carried a placard saying she was "mad as hell".

And then there's this lovely image:



Fucking scum.

Which is why I disagree with constituency representation.

So do I, but only because I broadly oppose democracy as a whole.

But as long as democracy is here to stay, constituency representation really seems like the only way to do it. Edmund Burke's local knowledge and all that; what fucking good is a State making regional decisions when it has virtually no connection to the region in question? The most I could get behind is multi-member constituencies.

I'm not convinced by the people who claim seats should be allocated according to national vote share.

I do support AV, in that the representative of a constituency should be the first to cross the 50pc threshold of support, though.

Quote from: Casper on April 26, 2015, 07:53:03 PM

My personal lord and savior, President Reagan, did no wrong.
He tore down the Iron Curtain with his bare hands and single-handedly ended the USSR.

Sure he did. 11 Soviet republics left the SU and Gorbachev reforms caused the end of it, not Reagan. When Reagan became president the SU was nowhere near what it was the years before him and it was already going down hill.

It's unfair to say Reagan did nothing. Diplomatically he was massive, and forcing the Soviets into an arms race he knew they couldn't win. I mean, fuck, Reagan knew the Soviets were going to fall way before the likes of Arthur Schlesinger did.