Yeah , I am a small c conservative with socialist leanings and liberal breath
Kinda leaves me nowhere I suppose.
1 Like
He looks a proper gammon.*
*Am I doing socially acceptable racism correctly?
1 Like
Yes.
Being 'câonservative or being mildly socialist should not remove oneâs sense of decency and care for other varieties of human beings. Calling people gammons or woke says more about the user of the expression in a very negative sense than about the subject.
2 Likes
âWokeâ isnât a racist slur. âGammonâ is because itâs based on skin colour.
1 Like
I generally have a plant based diet so I canât really help you with your pork based racism. 
2 Likes
Is it really though? Could be back etymology, because it meant nonsense or rubbish in the 18th century, eg youâre gammoning me meant youâre spinning me a line.
1 Like
Just saying bullshit 
Meanwhile..
These bloody cricket players coming over here and⌠winning 
No, I donât think so, unless you mean by blood pressure Itâs because of this chapâŚ
Who said things like thisâŚ
Misidentify Pakistani cricket team? Pompey?
I was about to remind everyone that Scummers have a reputation for getting things wrong. But trying to find a link to show how stupid those from Pompey are I found this instead. âThe Evening Standard in April this year, in a piece about the overblown paedophile panic, said: 'There has been a spate of attacks by dumb-headed vigilantes on paediatricians in the mistaken belief they are paedophiles.'mA spate? Melanie Phillips has made the same mistake. In a piece about anti-paedophile hysteria in the Daily Mail in December 2001, she asked: 'Who can forget the targeting of an innocent childrenâs doctor in Portsmouth by a populace too ignorant and enraged to recognise the difference between paedophile and paediatrician?â
From here: https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/a-tale-told-too-much-the-paediatrician-vigilantes/
That doesnât mean that Scummers are all intelligent and caring people, but did give me some pause for thought. (for once)
âScummersâ What we Sotonians call those silly enough to chose to be born in Pompey. We have called them that since times of industrial strife when their dockies scabbed, as Soâton was striking.
They call us the same name. Because they are too stupid to have original ideas.
Actually, I did work out of Pompey for several years. Lots of them are thick.
But no more than anywhere else.
Adding
The Scummer vs Skate story is my version. Others differ. A lot
1 Like
Iâll ask again, whoâs the leader?
The leader of the modern Blackshirts has been named, who is the leader of âantifaâ?
3 Likes
Strange how some words are so loaded.
Antifa: Anti-Fascist Who woud not want to be called anti fascist?
Woke: Who wants to be thought of as sleep walking through life and being unaware and ignorant of reality?
Far better to be awake and not fascist.
More spin form Minitrue.
4 Likes
You might as well ask, âWhoâs the leader of capitalism/socialism/the fight against climate change?â
One can share values, and describe oneself as being antifa, without that meaning there is a leader somewhere. Thatâs how something like antifa works.
Meanwhile, @vero is correct in saying that âgammonâ can mean ânonsenseâ or a fake story. Itâs not used like that any more, from what I can tell (the last time I came across it was in PG Wodehouse, I think): nowadays, itâs a playground insult some on the left use to describe people whose views they disagree with.
(Itâs a bit different to âwokeâ, which actually describes a worldview quite accurately, using a term those who hold that worldview coined.)
Exactly my point, so-called âantifaâ is nothing more than a set of principles without an underpinning organisation.
To compare that with the modern-day Blackshirts who have a clear set of, frankly horrific*, objectives and a leadership structure doesnât really fly.
*Unless, of course, division and hate is your thing
Not any more and you even see it here, people using âwokeâ as a general derisive term for any part of modern life that they donât like.
1 Like
Is it racist to eat pork or racist not to?
Racism was so much simpler in the 1970s.
1 Like
I refer you to my earlier statement. Eating pork is not my department, in any sense. Maybe ask one of the omnivores on the forumâŚ
Regardless are they not thugs? Violent,threatening ,abusive. That was my point. Just ask young Bob. Do they not wear masks?
I have no doubt there are thugs in all elements of society. Some, as in the case you cite, are aberrations, others, like the Blackshirts , have it as an entry requirement.
1 Like
When it was Palestinian protests people were arrested.
2 Likes
I think the far left and the far right are equally capable of being dangerous.
I remember Dianne Abbot once trying to explain the virtues of Mao, saying he did more good than harm! Not sure how you square that when he was responsible for 60 million deaths!
Extremism becomes a problem when ideology replaces reason.
I have always voted Conservative, I reached voting age a couple of years into Blair. But to be fair I thought Tony Blair did a pretty good job, and also Brown after him. I was even willing to give Starmer a chance, (more than his own party as it turned out) although I couldnât quite bring myself to vote for him.
What particularly frustrates me about parts of left is they are so entrenched. They donât give an inch. There is this absolute certainty that their position is not simply an opinion, but the morally correct one!
They will go to extreme lengths like organising tactical voting in the last election. Once they get their way, itâs not to their liking, they then just jump ship. Look how fast they jumped from Starmer to the Greens.
Once you convince yourself that you occupy the moral high ground, it becomes very easy to dismiss opposing arguments rather than engage with them.
Far right now is basically a blanket term of anything that the left doesnât agree with it. The issue with that is it loses all meaning, and actual far right groups become far more legitimised because of it.
The same goes for racism, anti Islam is now racist. I am not anti Islam, people should be free to believe whatever silly thing they want, just as long as it doesnât impact on others.
But people ridicule Scientology, (also silly to me, but no more than Christianity or any other religion) and apparently that is fine!
3 Likes
Well, Iâm of the left (obviously) and I wouldnât have called previous conservative governments far right but I do call the likes of Farage, Yaxley-Lennon, Lowe, etc far right. I also call those blocking Dover far right. Am I wrong to do so?
I donât think Badenoch is far right, sheâs just cos-playing to try to recover voters from the actual far right but an imitation can be just as dangerous.
I have no desire to engage with any of the named above as that merely suggests that their hate and division is something thatâs worthy of debate. I donât want to find a âmiddle groundâ with these people as thatâs not what their looking for. Every concession leads to greater demands.
1 Like
To attack those working for the RNLI is reprehensible, regardless of your political stance.
I suspect why masks are being worn, if statistics from recent Right Wing protests are anything to go by, is because that a large % of the protesters already have criminal records.
In the 2024 Southport protests, 70% of those arrested already had criminal records for serious offences. Many for domestic violence.
At a protest outside Downing Street 62% of those arrested had criminal records for a variety of crimes; violence, drugs, child sex offences.
So, I think we can safely call many of the people who take part in these protests, violent thugs.
3 Likes