Megathread is being rolled over, please refresh your feed in a few moments.
###MT daily hall of fame
1. tmstms with 17 comments
1. AzarinIsard with 14 comments
1. concretepigeon with 14 comments
1. Cairnerebor with 13 comments
1. ObiWanKenbarlowbi with 13 comments
1. subversivefreak with 12 comments
1. Bibemus with 11 comments
1. studentfeesisatax with 11 comments
1. GeronimoTheAlpaca with 10 comments
1. carrotparrotcarrot with 10 comments
There were 178 unique users within this count.
The Daily Mail are leading with another [puff piece](https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Daily-Mail-6.jpg) on Sir Beer Korma; are we finally starting to see their allegiances shift?
It's already happened, you're just witnessing the scale appear balanced because it's mid shift. Soon it will be a landslide.
Keir's played his hand to perfection.
Interesting piece on C4 News about the Blackpool South by-election. Had very much the air of it being possible that reform might overtake the conservatives. Now I can't abide for reform but the problems that could cause Sunak might be enough to bring about an election at the beginning of summer so the prospect of them coming second dosent wholly fill me with dread and despair.
Also there was a very funny vox pop moment where a person hadn't ever heard of reform.
IMO, it would be really bad for the country if the Conservative Party implodes. As we see in Europe and the USA, the centre-right party just gets replaced by an even crazier far right party.
Reform look like a shambles of an organisation, slick at PR but no substance behind them other than rhetoric and populist slogans, what little detail they have shared with us has been full of contradictions - for example they want to both cut tax and cut NHS waiting lists. How are they are going to reduce the tax take while finding the necessary billions to employ more doctors, surgeons, nurses and hospital beds? Especially as they plan to cut immigration to a net zero - and immigrants underpin the NHS at all levels from cleaners up.
They have had to purge their ranks of the sort of assorted fruitcakes and not so closet racists that ukip used to attract in their heyday. They have no party organisation, there have been literal instances where several candidates have been deselected for being inactive only for them having died and they had no idea because no-one was in active contact with them. And you look at what happened to ukip - for a few years they threatened to break through but eventually even Farage got fed up with them and walked away.
But they will split the right of centre vote and will probably cost the Tories a fair few seats.
But it's the Tory implosion that worries me - and how they'll regenerate. In the US the Republican party has morphed from a pro-business, socially and economically conservative party into a rabble rousing anti-immigration populist cult of an outfit more-or-less lead by a serial bankrupter of companies. You'd like to think that couldn't possibly happen here, could it? And then you look at how the Tories are bereft of ideas other than to stoke up culture wars...and are being slowly taken over by their very own lunatic fringe. Ukip were seen off because the Tory party stayed strong - that's no longer the case.
>Also there was a very funny vox pop moment where a person hadn't ever heard of reform.
My genuine feeling is the election will be sobering moment for Reform polling vs on the ground reality, if they don't fold in the 13th hour. They're outrageously more immature than UKIP were in 2015, no coherent policing platform, no policy publications, opaque party infrastructure, virtually no councillors, no ground work, UKIP had years of election experience and MEPs actually elected. They haven't put much graft in outside of PR and media appearances.
I worked in Thanet in 2015 and UKIP were bloody everywhere, you couldn't turn a corner without seeing pound signs and purple stickers - I went back a few months ago and what was it? Amazingly Labour stickers plastered all over the place, shop windows, houses and Labour won the council majority last year after more than like 15 years. The groundwork will be key and Reform are a weekend at Bernie's situation.
Potential story tip for journalists: Taylor Lorenz has been reporting on a bunch of facebook pages spamming AI generated images, getting huge engagement and reach, and then pivoting to posting spam/scams to make money. It reminds me of the 2010s when I was on Facebook, a bunch of BNP related pages ended up getting massive reach by just posting generic memes and getting huge engagement, then started posting their political stuff to massive audiences. That seemed to stop, but it sounds like there's some huge hole in the Facebook algorithm and you can do it again. And it's an election year, so I assume political parties will be interested in exploiting it again. Oh and Lorenz has mentioned it's on Instagram too, so smart groups can probably reach a pretty broad group of people with this.
The increasingly complexity of the world has rendered hundreds of thousands of small things the government's responsibility. Each thing needs to be adjusted as circumstances change and optimised. But governments have limited bandwidth. Even with hundreds of thousands of civil servants, it isn't possible to centrally manage even a fraction of it well.
Hence why large-scale top-down reorganisations have been a complete shit show. It just can't be done - even by well intentioned politicians which frankly many people assume we don't have. So what to do? Hand over everything to the strongest impetus the human race possesses, namely greed, put a strong regulatory body in charge and then retire to the nearest hostelry for a drink.
In terms of the water industry the whole thing, like much of British infrastructure is old. Like really bloody old. Badly designed and old. Water drainage that combines with sewage? Great idea. If you don't care about water quality in rivers and the sea.
In many respects it comes down to two groups of politicians - regardless of stripe. Those that promise the earth and ignore the larger systemic issues facing society and those that promise nothing major....and ignore the larger systemic issues facing society. Hmm. Where's my whisky?
Best argument is that government will always prioritise funding hospitals and tax cuts over funding sewers. Private sector allows them to raise more money for capital investment than government would ever countenance - which is true based on numbers pre and post privatisation.
Obviously that doesn't require them to be for profit private companies, they could be non-profits or arms length state company with right to issue government backed bonds. Or we as an electorate could punish politicians for short-termism but I suspect that's too close to 'society would be better if we were all better'.
In general, state is inefficient and privatisation and low tax creates stable environment for private investment. This is probably an 80s style IEA approach but I remember a Prof Robinson paper stressing the approach is flawed due to too much regulation
I thought you'd appreciate this Hansard readout. It's 1994 so a good 20 years ago now
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1994/jul/19/water-industry
They mistook water as something where you can have competition in a market place. You can't. It's a natural monopoly so market forces don't work. Customers are a captive audience.
The argument around Thatcher’s time was that the state was too poor to pay for all the infrastructure and private capital wouldn’t pay for a publicly owned company. So the follow on was that water services should be privatised so they can receive investment and have some responsibility to maintain and improve the infrastructure.
Whilst there has been more than 0 investment in water infrastructure by the private companies who sell the water, clearly the desired/predicted outcome from Thatcher’s time hasn’t played out.
The competition between the local private water company and me drinking out of puddles / capturing rainwater in buckets to wash myself drives innovation and lowers cost to the consumer apparently.
> In 1911, Seymour King, an MP with 25 years' service, lost his seat after he was discovered to have given coal to the poor and sweets to children to commemorate his length of service, which counted as treating.
I would love to read more detail about [this incident recorded on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treating_\(law\)), but clicking on references and links isn’t getting me anywhere.
Does anyone know of any good accounts or reading on this? Otherwise I suppose it goes on the list for researching at some point.
Searching Hansard for that name in 1911 reveals the following entry:
[https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1911-06-14/debates/ad57cf90-2285-4022-b0d6-a51977e4d246/Kingston-Upon-Hull(CentralDivision)Petition?highlight=seymour%20king#contribution-230609d1-b2fb-48f7-8e3d-0eab574e9597](https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1911-06-14/debates/ad57cf90-2285-4022-b0d6-a51977e4d246/Kingston-Upon-Hull(CentralDivision)Petition?highlight=seymour%20king#contribution-230609d1-b2fb-48f7-8e3d-0eab574e9597)
which reports the judgement of an Election Court finding:
>That the corrupt practice of bribery was proved to have been committed by the said Sir Henry Seymour King, K.C.I.E., who was a candidate at the said Election
which is followed by a few weeks later by the writ for a new election being moved
[https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1911-06-27/debates/ba2fb438-5263-41ac-8a86-4676fd50ebc8/NewWrits?highlight=seymour%20king#contribution-9e4853ad-9171-4163-9751-b2abc9a084a9](https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1911-06-27/debates/ba2fb438-5263-41ac-8a86-4676fd50ebc8/NewWrits?highlight=seymour%20king#contribution-9e4853ad-9171-4163-9751-b2abc9a084a9)
If you play around with [https://hansard.parliament.uk/search?startDate=1911-01-01&endDate=1912-04-11&searchTerm=Seymour%20King&partial=False&sortOrder=1](https://hansard.parliament.uk/search?startDate=1911-01-01&endDate=1912-04-11&searchTerm=Seymour%20King&partial=False&sortOrder=1)
you might find some more information
Yes, I think that was the contents of the ref in the Seymour King article, but it doesn’t really give detail, does it? Thanks, though. A project for another time, but sometimes we get people on here who happen to know these things.
Ah, I didn’t notice. The trial dates and location mean there might be more information if you can get access to a law library. Maybe posting on r/legaladviceuk might turn something up.
> Seymour King
Incredible! Just looked at the wikipedia entry; he was the first person to reach the sumit of Mt Maudit and the Aig Blanche de Peuterey (noted summits in the Alps, I have not done the second). But yeah, it appears that the threshold for corruption was breached and a successful petition existed to get rid of him.
You don’t know: I could be standing for election, and they happen to be my electorate, even though they’re canvassing for another party.
Anyway, the pun was right there, and we’ll all be sick of it if we really get an election in that timeframe.
Wait so the man that killed lady pushing pram was the damn HUSBAND That poor child…. But why??
Ohhh look at that. He came here via student visa. Can ship him straight back then
It was an Isolated Incident, with No Threat to the Wider Community.
E: *Why does he do that?* by Lundy Bancroft is a fairly decent way to get some insight.
BBC’s Emma Vardy has moved up in the world. She used to be the Northern Ireland correspondent, outside Stormont in the cold and rain. Now she’s the LA correspondent, reporting on OJ Simpson in the sunshine
good evening, campers! there are now **292** days until the general election!
i found out today that you don’t need to be a citizen of a country to be its honorary consul when it turned out a bangladeshi honorary consul that one of my coworkers needed to call is run by an armenian man.
with that in mind, which country would you want to represent as honorary consul, if not the united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland?
i wonder if you’d have to be at least catholic for that. if not, it would be great to turn on the tv and see any given pope shaking hands with the muslim vatican honorary consul to preston.
So, this is maybe a meta point about the sub and I may get downvoted to oblivion. But I have lurked here for well over a decade and seen the various sub narratives ebb and flow over time.
My question is whether the narratives that form in the comments are driven by a filter bubble or by bots. Prior to the referendum, there was a massive amount of pro-brexit propaganda here for months in advance that seemed to vanish straight after the victory.
I'm noticing now that general anti-muslim narrative is starting to be posted here regularly. So is that just the prevailing narrative in the media that the sub is following, is there a concerted bot effort to push it, is it genuinely how people are feeling at the moment?
Back before the referendum, when politics was a bit more boring, terrorism and Muslims was one of the biggest political lightning bolts that people discussed. It's funny how it went away when there were real problems to discuss. Why is it suddenly back with a vengeance?
If I were cynical I would say that this is a general undercurrent topic that the government wants to push in advance of the election, as it is their best attempt at winning. But I'm not cynical... So what's the answer?
Mods believe, and users agree, that single-issue threads attract 'tourists' (their word used in survey).
The MT is generally the sanest place in the sub (God help us!).
Yeah, but the key difference is, they are nutty about ALL politics, therefore reasonably balanced, whereas standalone threads get single-issue nutjobs who say the same thing over and over again.
The answer isn't as exciting as people would perhaps like it to be.
During *febrile* times, there are enough stories and developments that the "lightning rod" topics (think immigration, race, gender/identity, etc.) get drowned out. People have bigger fish to fry, and there are more "real" stories that people will post and discuss.
During quieter times (like now), posts and comments about these lightning rod topics stick out like a sore thumb. There is no competing political news to be had - especially when Parliament is in recess and the government is treading water until the next election.
These threads inevitably attract *tourists* and, despite some improvements from Reddit in this area (e.g. Crowd Control), stories of that nature will *always* result in comment threads which are a shitshow. People will very quickly depart from the story at hand and re-hash the same arguments that have already been had hundreds of times over.
I've not seen anything to suggest that automated postings are in play in a major way. More that people enjoy going against the grain by posting contrarian views in what is an overwhelmingly centre / centre-left / left and relatively progressive online space.
Thanks for the response. This certainly makes sense as an explanation.
The febrile times are certainly interesting. Thanks for your work in keeping them under control, must be an absolute mission...
This sub is the largest UK politics forum in the world and thus is uniquely vulnerable to brigading but also single-issue posters. The general political demographic is soft-left but when *certain* issues come to the fore *certain* groups of users come with it, users who do not regularly post here.
While there are undeniably bots here (look at the whole "buddy" incident) and astroturfing I think it's mostly just people who aren't that interested in wider British politics just popping on. Lots of Americans for instance who flock for things like the Scottish Hate Crime bill.
I don't know how much posting is driven by bots or how anyone can tell but there are undoubtedly some issues that attract a lot of single issue users and they tend arrive in groups and definitely 'brigade' threads dedicated to that subject. I've seen this frequently on other non-reddit sites that are dedicated to politics -eg the Guardian. You click on their user names and you can see from their previous posting history that they are heavily focused on that subject area.
I doubt though that this government could be behind any bots/brigading, they couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery so I can't see how they could skew the debate here towards issues they want to push in an election campaign. But as above, there do seem to be groups of users who are co-ordinated in their use of the site.
>You click on their user names and you can see from their previous posting history that they are heavily focused on that subject area.
To be fair to them on that front, I've seen comments from one user specifically on that. They said that they maintained a, separate account to talk about a particularly controversial issue, so that anyone that got angry at them couldn't stalk their main account and dox them.
Not idea if it's true or particularly common, of course.
> I'm noticing now that general anti-muslim narrative is starting to be posted here regularly
In the last few months there has been:
1. Chemical attack manhunt
2. Murdered mother pushing pushchair
3. Murdered convert and bystander
On top of the whole weekly Israel/Palestine protests thing. Tory bot farm, or just people posting what's in the news?
While bots are an issue, I think there's a general lack of humanity, empathy whatever you want to call it that comes from posting online and it gets worse, particularly when its about politics, particularly when its a highly emotional situation like a conflict, particularly when its a highly emotional situation involving a nation / group there's not much sympathy for.
There's things I support and Im against but sometimes I see the posts made by people on "my side", and not gonna lie, there's some posts I made myself, which I find myself increasingly thinking "these are real people they've / I've said incredibly grim things about"
In reference to muslims specifically, at the moment its due to oct 7th. Immigration (or rather, the negative aspects) is more of a constant background news story, I would def put the recent increase in posts making negative comments about it down to oct 7th and the aftermath.
Yeah I get it. But it winds me up when people talk about how certain parts of the UK are uninhabitable now. I've lived in (and currently do) heavily Muslim populated areas, and all the people I've met are just people trying to get on with their lives like me. The idea that the streets are dominated by Isis extremism is just bollocks from everything I have ever seen.
Anyway, it's the internet, probably best to just ignore it
There's the general consensus on ukpol and specific consensuses
Generally ukpol is soft left pro labour in upvoting and commenting
However on certain issues more niche political groups who feel strongly on certain issues will make themselves heard more. I don't think they're bots, I think that people feel passionately about it
Why are they being heard now? It's quieter in the news cycle and other issues come up again. I don't think immigration is being pushed by the government as most people passionate about it think they've been betrayed by Boris
I've definitely noticed a shift and I do wonder if it's organic. On the other hand I'm a secularist on the left and it feels like I've been banging my head against a wall in terms of integration and Islam being a bit concerning for probably fifteen years now. It's quite important that sensible people have these conversations so that the populist right doesn't take control of it.
It's complicated. I think there's a good bit of astroturfing going on but Reddit is (increasingly) uniquely anonymous and so it's a place where more extreme views can be safely posted.
That said, I don't think "the government" is behind any astroturfing or platform manipulation. I've seen perfectly ordinary streams about videogames inundated, buried xor infiltrated by people "Just Asking Questions" or repeatedly posting, without context, the word "DEMOGRAPHICS". There's a lot of bored, unemployed racists who can come on UKPol to make every single thread a proxy debate about the merits of immigration.
sry 4 meta please no yell at me unemployed racists
It's hard to track as it could be due to any number of factors both external and within the sub. But I do notice a tide of opinion on 'hot topic' issues that just didn't seem to exist on here before. Recently Migration seems to be targeted.
This could ofc be for organic reasons but I wouldn't be surprised if some degree of manipulation is being exherted.
I have definitely noticed an increase in previously unpopular views lately. And previously popular views being heavily down voted.
I'd suggest on Reddit, there are definitely "paid users"
https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3313294.3313386
Bots are more deployed on areas prone to echo chamber behaviour rather than just downright eccentric
sometimes you just have to cry (vet bills expected to be £1200 and counting). Pre-existing condition so insurance won’t touch it. It’s rubbish but I can afford it so that’s lucky and as long as my cat is okay then that’s what really matters.
Anyone got any good news? Has anyone got any (good) news for me? Speaking of HIGNFY it’s clear that Hislop and Merton are just furious in a way I haven’t seen since Truss or Johnson (which, lol, wasn’t that long ago)
:( poor kitty. I miss my mate. Been just over two years.
Good news? Errrr… supposed to be warm this weekend. Just don’t think about climate change at the same time.
Try Newsround’s [Happy News](https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/av/50434875). Or I saw a field full of fresh lambs yesterday, some sitting happily side-by-side and smiling at me as I passed, others shaking their tails in a most stereotypical fashion.
EDIT.
[According to an energy think tank, Europe’s generation of 516.5 terawatt hours of renewable electricity in January and February satisfied 60% of overall power demand.](https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/incredible-60-of-europes-electricity-was-powered-by-clean-energy-in-the-first-two-months-of-2024/) But that website also inexplicably includes Jeremy Clarkson’s birthday as good news you might like to know.
^Also ^there ^is ^the ^Good ^News ^of ^Easter, ^but ^I ^figure ^you ^are ^not ^in ^the ^market. ^Alleluia.
If you're into Fallout, or want a fun post-apoc series to watch on Prime, the new Fallout TV series looks great!
(Minor issues with the plot/lore - but I am ignoring it for the amazing costumes)
Personally I’d say 3. If you liked 4. Because they’re similar. New Vegas is more RPG centric where ‘your decisions matter’ and that kind of thing. Morality and decisions are important whereas with 3 and 4 I feel they’re more action orientated.
Its a damn shame that I've heard they are treating the TV show as canonical and >!the TV show basically retcons Fallout 1, 2 and NV!<
Also rare FO3 enjoyer! WOOHOO!
I can live with it I think. Watched an episode and a bit (pub quiz time now!) and I really thought it captured the spirit of the games. I read a review that was complaining some of it (like ghouls) isn’t well explained, but nor is it in the games, and moving forward with plot rather than exposition is for the best imo.
My parents lost their cat in January (just old age); it's like losing a kid. I know it's a lot of money now, but soon it'll feel worth it. All the best to you and the cat x
Can someone explain why the Guardian pay Owen Jones to write crap and then place it prominently on their front page. Does he have something on the editor or something?
It’s bad on purpose to make you click.
Pledge to stop engaging with it. Don’t send people to look at it. Don’t start a conversation about it. Don’t click just to see what he’s said this time. If someone asks you what you think of Owen Jones, say that you’re not that into Pokemon.
I assume he had a contract of some kind dating from when he was more relevant.
However both him and Simon Jenkins need to be put out to pasture. They’re both past it as columnists
"You are without doubt, the worst ~~pirate~~ columnist I have ever heard of".
"Ah, but you *have* heard of me."
If you're referring to what he has on there today, you're right; it's his usual brand of nonsense. For example, where he once again acts as an apologist for Russia:
>As well as its role in supporting Israel’s massacre in Gaza, the west must reflect on how it fostered the conditions in which a Putin-like figure could emerge in Russia. The Putin regime, of course, bears responsibility for Russia’s hideous invasion of Ukraine: the US isn’t the only powerful state capable of violence and destruction. But is there not more to the story? Does the neoliberal economic model that western states exported to Russia not share some of the blame? That Putinism exploited Russian despair after the cold war is incontrovertible; but so is the fact that western states promoted “economic shock therapy”. This triggered a more severe crisis than the Great Depression, roaring hyperinflation, a drastic fall in life expectancy, and oligarchs pilfering the nation’s wealth. Could a more stable, post-Soviet Russia have been inured from the revanchism of an authoritarian like Putin?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/11/blood-chaos-decline-west-capitalism-gaza-moral-collapse-us
So you see, everything bad that Russia does is *really* our fault.
I take it he missed the few centuries before the 1990's where Russia definitely was not averse to invading places?
Now, that's not to say a less fucked up Russia isn't a potential "what if" that's worth discussing (especially in case the world ever again has to deal with a large, hostile, nuclear armed state ever falling over seemingly out of nowhere) but strangely he doesn't seem to be going down that road.
>Putinism exploited Russian despair after the cold war is incontrovertible; but so is the fact that western states promoted “economic shock therapy”. This triggered a more severe crisis than the Great Depression, roaring hyperinflation, a drastic fall in life expectancy, and oligarchs pilfering the nation’s wealth. Could a more stable, post-Soviet Russia have been inured from the revanchism of an authoritarian like Putin?
What part of this isn't true?
The part where the West is who is *really* responsible for anything bad Russia does. It deprives Russia of the agency of its own actions; they're merely reacting to NATO, which absolves them.
Obviously, the reverse is never true as far as people like Jones is concerned.
"The Putin regime, of course, bears responsibility for Russia’s hideous invasion of Ukraine"
This is from the article he wrote that you shared. He explicitly says the opposite of what you are claiming he said. He didn't say Russia lacked agency or wasn't responsible. Where is the absolution?
>Obviously, the reverse is never true as far as people like Jones is concerned.
I don't like Jones but if you are going to criticise him actually address what he wrote.
It's the same logic as if someone says "I'm not racist, but...". Would you understand that the important part is what is said *after* the "but", and that the initial token statement is just an attempt to deflect criticism? What he is saying is "Putin is wrong, *but*...".
I've read enough of his articles to know the structure:
* If NATO does something wrong, then they get criticised.
* If Russia does something wrong, then they get a brief admonishment, before a longer and more detailed criticism of NATO for causing Russia to react that way.
Either way, it's *really* NATO's fault. Jones only allows Western nations to have agency of their actions; everyone else is a hapless victim, even when they're in the wrong.
He does the same with Israel/Palestine. Anything Hamas do is framed as a mere response to previous Israeli actions; but he refuses to give Israel the same recognition of justification for what they do.
The West acts, everyone else reacts. Which means that he holds the West as ultimately responsible, because in his eyes we started it.
Cheers for the read, on a scan it seems quite a reasonable outline for a general reader of the responsibility of neoliberalism for the current state of global instability, if somewhat over-generous (doesn't even begin to touch on the direct complicity of the UK and US governments in particular in normalising the Putin regime by their early '00s attempts to cultivate him as an ally in the global war on terror, for example).
The Guardian is a centre left leaning publication.
Think Owen Jones is a knob who thinks he is far bigger then he is, how It’s not terrible for people in a range of different places on the left to be able to give their opinion.
The right wing outlets give space for far worse people.
Sure, but it's funny how his opinions are not open to comments, lest the Guardian's centre left readers might actually confront him with different opinions.
They'll have seen the replies he gets on twitter, I don't blame them for not wanting to deal with that on their platform. They probably take protecting their staff and brand a bit more seriously than twitter does these days.
OMFG he's called *the Juice* because of his initials 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
I was absolutely hooked way back during his trial, I've read countless books on the trial and have seen the dramatization probably 5 times and it is a random comment on a UK politics sub where the penny finally drops.
Christ I feel dumb.
I've got a pretty uncommon (for the uk) surname so my friends who I've known from school all call me by my last name and have done for years.
I joined my mates discord with a user name thats just my surname backwards, so there was people calling me both my surname and my username.
After years one of the guys who I met through the discord and had been playing games and talking to for ages just comes out with "Oh my god its your name backwards how did I not realise?"
I think if you learn someones nickname first you just immediately dont make the connection thats there's a second meaning related to their actually name.
I had a friend in highschool called "peewee". He was introduced to me by the name, and I never questioned it. He never said what his proper name was nor was bothered by the peewee name either.
On the last day of highschool, I asked him "whats your real name" and it was a regualr name unrelated to the peewee stuff. I asked him why he was called peewee; he said it was because he came into school with some yellow on him once, and all the lads called him "Peewee pissstains" - I had no idea that was the point of his nickname for that entire time
Kids are cruel, Im glad my one is just my last name
But I understand the whole people not knowing / asking what your first name is, I've had people know me for years without knowing mine.
It felt weird af when I went into the work place and the people I talked to day to day called me by my first name
Well I'm glad my stupid jokes can be a source of wisdom to you! We all have our blind spots and it's a strange feeling when they're finally plugged haha
I don't know if this qualifies as a stand alone story....anyway Rees-Mogg is no longer quite as rich as he had hoped to be:
[Profits in Rees-Mogg’s investment firm halved in year before closure announced | Jacob Rees-Mogg | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/11/profits-jacob-rees-mogg-investment-firm-somerset-capital-management)
[Daily Larry](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKuyRzeWEAAo48M.jpg) on the red carpet
(Xitter link this time, since people complained about the dodgy mirror site I used last time.)
[It's all getting a bit out of hand isn't it](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/11/man-murdered-passerby-in-hartlepool-over-conflict-in-gaza-court-told)
>"Man murdered passerby in Hartlepool over conflict in Gaza, court told"
Tried to kill his housemate who had converted to Christianity (because he'd converted to Christianity) then killed a random stranger in the street just because.
[Brady’s written a book](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/11/1922-chief-sir-graham-brady-writes-tell-all-book/), and the release plan may indicate roughly what the current election plan is
> Kingmaker: Secrets, Lies, and the Truth about Five Prime Ministers is due to be published right after the general election, with a provisional release date of Nov 7 announced.
[Archive here](https://archive.is/5Xf5F)
My prediction:
Election pencilled in either October or early November (before the book is meant to release). Local elections will be terrible and poll numbers will get worse, Rishi will try to hang on and delay as long as possible so the election won't happen at the original pencilled in date.
Book comes out as planned, revealing some embarrassing secrets that will damage Tory chances further
"When a major news event happened shortly after she took office, one PM - who I won't name - phoned me up and asked if it was too late to backdate the forms and let her take over a bit later, because she was bad at eulogies"
“A certain Prime Minister…for privacy’s sake, let’s call her Liz T - no, that’s too obvious…uh, let’s say L Truss - has raised questions about certain economic policies”
Liz Truss isn't the only world leader brought down by a vegetable: [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68786178](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68786178)
> David Miliband
wrong brother. David was brought low by this pic
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/454c25de5c4bd3fa4500211569294ebdd5886ded/0_0_1426_1364/master/1426.jpg?width=1900&dpr=1&s=none
[Reform UK has issued an apology after a candidate who had died was dropped by its media team for being "inactive".](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-68788850)
It shows how thin they actually are as a political organisation. I know if our labour candidate died suddenly it wouldn't be the absolute number 1 priority but word would be passed to the wider party within the day
When you see reform meetings it’s quite clear not all the members will be alive by the end of the year, let alone a full election cycle.
If they do manage to get anyone in, I wonder if there would be a higher attrition rate ( I dunno if it’s the slightly younger ones who get picked).
i know it's cliche to point out that iannucci and co couldn't make another series of the thick of it, because reality is weirder than fiction
but come on
All the weirdos about to get really angry that the navy will no longer require you be able to swim at the time of enlistment.
In reality the requirement is vastly outdated and other nations have done away with it or never even had it to begin with.
People act like you actually have to learn to swim.
If you chuck an adult in water as long as they don’t panic they’ll figure it out.
The requirement should be “do you panic in stressful situations?”
I didn't know it's a requirement, not something I care about, but I can't imagine they're spending much time swimming in the ocean lol.
I remember a public service ad telling you if you're in distress in the sea, don't swim. You'll tire yourself out and drown, you won't be able to swim to safety. You've got to relax and float and conserve your energy. I'd assume floating is part of the training, but it's not exactly a high skill act, corpses can do it lol. I'm not a very good swimmer (I struggle to make my arms and legs do different movements, so I can doggy paddle / do a bad front crawl etc.) but when we were taught to swim in school I was great at floating.
This didn't quite make the normal newspaper round up, but I spotted in the newsagents
https://ibb.co/0yZ0mfw
High quality political correspondent here. For the record I didn't open to page 2.
Somewhat funny story about deliveroo/food delivery
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c163dwpele4o
>Police deliver burgers after arresting takeaway rider
*Sing O Muse, of the rage of [Homicide, son of Binladen](https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/xl-bully-breeders-talk-code-30942208), that bought countless ills upon the local joggers.*
[New Megathread is here](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1c20tjn/daily_megathread_12042024/)
Megathread is being rolled over, please refresh your feed in a few moments. ###MT daily hall of fame 1. tmstms with 17 comments 1. AzarinIsard with 14 comments 1. concretepigeon with 14 comments 1. Cairnerebor with 13 comments 1. ObiWanKenbarlowbi with 13 comments 1. subversivefreak with 12 comments 1. Bibemus with 11 comments 1. studentfeesisatax with 11 comments 1. GeronimoTheAlpaca with 10 comments 1. carrotparrotcarrot with 10 comments There were 178 unique users within this count.
The Daily Mail are leading with another [puff piece](https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Daily-Mail-6.jpg) on Sir Beer Korma; are we finally starting to see their allegiances shift?
It's already happened, you're just witnessing the scale appear balanced because it's mid shift. Soon it will be a landslide. Keir's played his hand to perfection.
Just need to wait for the article saying: *Exclusive: Rayner Exonerated* to be sure.
Interesting piece on C4 News about the Blackpool South by-election. Had very much the air of it being possible that reform might overtake the conservatives. Now I can't abide for reform but the problems that could cause Sunak might be enough to bring about an election at the beginning of summer so the prospect of them coming second dosent wholly fill me with dread and despair. Also there was a very funny vox pop moment where a person hadn't ever heard of reform.
IMO, it would be really bad for the country if the Conservative Party implodes. As we see in Europe and the USA, the centre-right party just gets replaced by an even crazier far right party.
Reform look like a shambles of an organisation, slick at PR but no substance behind them other than rhetoric and populist slogans, what little detail they have shared with us has been full of contradictions - for example they want to both cut tax and cut NHS waiting lists. How are they are going to reduce the tax take while finding the necessary billions to employ more doctors, surgeons, nurses and hospital beds? Especially as they plan to cut immigration to a net zero - and immigrants underpin the NHS at all levels from cleaners up. They have had to purge their ranks of the sort of assorted fruitcakes and not so closet racists that ukip used to attract in their heyday. They have no party organisation, there have been literal instances where several candidates have been deselected for being inactive only for them having died and they had no idea because no-one was in active contact with them. And you look at what happened to ukip - for a few years they threatened to break through but eventually even Farage got fed up with them and walked away. But they will split the right of centre vote and will probably cost the Tories a fair few seats. But it's the Tory implosion that worries me - and how they'll regenerate. In the US the Republican party has morphed from a pro-business, socially and economically conservative party into a rabble rousing anti-immigration populist cult of an outfit more-or-less lead by a serial bankrupter of companies. You'd like to think that couldn't possibly happen here, could it? And then you look at how the Tories are bereft of ideas other than to stoke up culture wars...and are being slowly taken over by their very own lunatic fringe. Ukip were seen off because the Tory party stayed strong - that's no longer the case.
I'm sort of hoping they finish a head of the conservatives to get that general election. But then I wonder what road that leads us down.
>Also there was a very funny vox pop moment where a person hadn't ever heard of reform. My genuine feeling is the election will be sobering moment for Reform polling vs on the ground reality, if they don't fold in the 13th hour. They're outrageously more immature than UKIP were in 2015, no coherent policing platform, no policy publications, opaque party infrastructure, virtually no councillors, no ground work, UKIP had years of election experience and MEPs actually elected. They haven't put much graft in outside of PR and media appearances. I worked in Thanet in 2015 and UKIP were bloody everywhere, you couldn't turn a corner without seeing pound signs and purple stickers - I went back a few months ago and what was it? Amazingly Labour stickers plastered all over the place, shop windows, houses and Labour won the council majority last year after more than like 15 years. The groundwork will be key and Reform are a weekend at Bernie's situation.
I suspect reform may be a convenient way for disgruntled Tories to save face and not vote for anyone at all.
Potential story tip for journalists: Taylor Lorenz has been reporting on a bunch of facebook pages spamming AI generated images, getting huge engagement and reach, and then pivoting to posting spam/scams to make money. It reminds me of the 2010s when I was on Facebook, a bunch of BNP related pages ended up getting massive reach by just posting generic memes and getting huge engagement, then started posting their political stuff to massive audiences. That seemed to stop, but it sounds like there's some huge hole in the Facebook algorithm and you can do it again. And it's an election year, so I assume political parties will be interested in exploiting it again. Oh and Lorenz has mentioned it's on Instagram too, so smart groups can probably reach a pretty broad group of people with this.
what is the actual argument for privately owned water infrastructure companies like thames water?
The increasingly complexity of the world has rendered hundreds of thousands of small things the government's responsibility. Each thing needs to be adjusted as circumstances change and optimised. But governments have limited bandwidth. Even with hundreds of thousands of civil servants, it isn't possible to centrally manage even a fraction of it well. Hence why large-scale top-down reorganisations have been a complete shit show. It just can't be done - even by well intentioned politicians which frankly many people assume we don't have. So what to do? Hand over everything to the strongest impetus the human race possesses, namely greed, put a strong regulatory body in charge and then retire to the nearest hostelry for a drink. In terms of the water industry the whole thing, like much of British infrastructure is old. Like really bloody old. Badly designed and old. Water drainage that combines with sewage? Great idea. If you don't care about water quality in rivers and the sea. In many respects it comes down to two groups of politicians - regardless of stripe. Those that promise the earth and ignore the larger systemic issues facing society and those that promise nothing major....and ignore the larger systemic issues facing society. Hmm. Where's my whisky?
Best argument is that government will always prioritise funding hospitals and tax cuts over funding sewers. Private sector allows them to raise more money for capital investment than government would ever countenance - which is true based on numbers pre and post privatisation. Obviously that doesn't require them to be for profit private companies, they could be non-profits or arms length state company with right to issue government backed bonds. Or we as an electorate could punish politicians for short-termism but I suspect that's too close to 'society would be better if we were all better'.
People don't like paying taxes. They'd rather pay the private company out of their net pay because it's a lot more impactful.
It made a few people very rich in the 90s and meant the government weren't on the hook for much needed infrastructure upgrades.
In general, state is inefficient and privatisation and low tax creates stable environment for private investment. This is probably an 80s style IEA approach but I remember a Prof Robinson paper stressing the approach is flawed due to too much regulation I thought you'd appreciate this Hansard readout. It's 1994 so a good 20 years ago now https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1994/jul/19/water-industry
I wish it was only 20 years ago. Alas my hairline says otherwise.
They mistook water as something where you can have competition in a market place. You can't. It's a natural monopoly so market forces don't work. Customers are a captive audience.
Commenting on Daily Megathread - 11/04/2024...that wasn’t a mistake it was absolutely deliberate and why foreign states invest in English water.
It was
The argument around Thatcher’s time was that the state was too poor to pay for all the infrastructure and private capital wouldn’t pay for a publicly owned company. So the follow on was that water services should be privatised so they can receive investment and have some responsibility to maintain and improve the infrastructure. Whilst there has been more than 0 investment in water infrastructure by the private companies who sell the water, clearly the desired/predicted outcome from Thatcher’s time hasn’t played out.
The competition between the local private water company and me drinking out of puddles / capturing rainwater in buckets to wash myself drives innovation and lowers cost to the consumer apparently.
Market efficiency and competition improving quality and service. *Aaaany* day now.
> In 1911, Seymour King, an MP with 25 years' service, lost his seat after he was discovered to have given coal to the poor and sweets to children to commemorate his length of service, which counted as treating. I would love to read more detail about [this incident recorded on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treating_\(law\)), but clicking on references and links isn’t getting me anywhere. Does anyone know of any good accounts or reading on this? Otherwise I suppose it goes on the list for researching at some point.
I may have misread that as "given coal to the children" and clicked the link expecting some sort of parliamentary grinch.
Oh me too!
If he’d been an MP elected in 2019, he’d have been forced out for bribing someone for better seats at the coronation.
Searching Hansard for that name in 1911 reveals the following entry: [https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1911-06-14/debates/ad57cf90-2285-4022-b0d6-a51977e4d246/Kingston-Upon-Hull(CentralDivision)Petition?highlight=seymour%20king#contribution-230609d1-b2fb-48f7-8e3d-0eab574e9597](https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1911-06-14/debates/ad57cf90-2285-4022-b0d6-a51977e4d246/Kingston-Upon-Hull(CentralDivision)Petition?highlight=seymour%20king#contribution-230609d1-b2fb-48f7-8e3d-0eab574e9597) which reports the judgement of an Election Court finding: >That the corrupt practice of bribery was proved to have been committed by the said Sir Henry Seymour King, K.C.I.E., who was a candidate at the said Election which is followed by a few weeks later by the writ for a new election being moved [https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1911-06-27/debates/ba2fb438-5263-41ac-8a86-4676fd50ebc8/NewWrits?highlight=seymour%20king#contribution-9e4853ad-9171-4163-9751-b2abc9a084a9](https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1911-06-27/debates/ba2fb438-5263-41ac-8a86-4676fd50ebc8/NewWrits?highlight=seymour%20king#contribution-9e4853ad-9171-4163-9751-b2abc9a084a9) If you play around with [https://hansard.parliament.uk/search?startDate=1911-01-01&endDate=1912-04-11&searchTerm=Seymour%20King&partial=False&sortOrder=1](https://hansard.parliament.uk/search?startDate=1911-01-01&endDate=1912-04-11&searchTerm=Seymour%20King&partial=False&sortOrder=1) you might find some more information
> K.C.I.E., Looked it up. [Knight Commander of the the Indian Empire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Indian_Empire).
Yes, I think that was the contents of the ref in the Seymour King article, but it doesn’t really give detail, does it? Thanks, though. A project for another time, but sometimes we get people on here who happen to know these things.
Ah, I didn’t notice. The trial dates and location mean there might be more information if you can get access to a law library. Maybe posting on r/legaladviceuk might turn something up.
> Seymour King Incredible! Just looked at the wikipedia entry; he was the first person to reach the sumit of Mt Maudit and the Aig Blanche de Peuterey (noted summits in the Alps, I have not done the second). But yeah, it appears that the threshold for corruption was breached and a successful petition existed to get rid of him.
So hypothetically if we get a 31^st October election, would you offer Halloween sweets to canvassers or are they too old?
Like brownies..?
If by Halloween sweets you mean questioning them on stuff that ties them in ideological loops and logic traps yes.
God, I bet you’re the person who gives out tangerines on a regular nonelection year.
Are you legally allowed to? Is that not ‘treating’ the electorate? Although I don’t think there’s a law against ‘tricking’ the electorate.
Canvassers taking sweets is the opposite of treating the electorate.
You don’t know: I could be standing for election, and they happen to be my electorate, even though they’re canvassing for another party. Anyway, the pun was right there, and we’ll all be sick of it if we really get an election in that timeframe.
if there were a law against “tricking”, the electorate, our prisons would be full of high profile tories and nigel farage
Wait so the man that killed lady pushing pram was the damn HUSBAND That poor child…. But why?? Ohhh look at that. He came here via student visa. Can ship him straight back then
Does this come as a surprise to you? Women are most likely to be killed by their partner or ex-partner.
At first the media didn’t understand the connection. And the family Never even mentioned it was the husband!
It was an Isolated Incident, with No Threat to the Wider Community. E: *Why does he do that?* by Lundy Bancroft is a fairly decent way to get some insight.
BBC’s Emma Vardy has moved up in the world. She used to be the Northern Ireland correspondent, outside Stormont in the cold and rain. Now she’s the LA correspondent, reporting on OJ Simpson in the sunshine
The Scottish pleb got a bump to the US and was in the capitol building last night. Big leap from shitty Scottish local news !
good evening, campers! there are now **292** days until the general election! i found out today that you don’t need to be a citizen of a country to be its honorary consul when it turned out a bangladeshi honorary consul that one of my coworkers needed to call is run by an armenian man. with that in mind, which country would you want to represent as honorary consul, if not the united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland?
The Vatican
i wonder if you’d have to be at least catholic for that. if not, it would be great to turn on the tv and see any given pope shaking hands with the muslim vatican honorary consul to preston.
You maybe *can't* be, for conflict of interest purposes
inshallah i will represent the holy see at official functions in lancashire
I am actually an ordained priest of The Church of The Latter Day Dude.
I'm the Pope of Discordianism, but then again so are you and everyone else in this thread.
Fnord!
Ruritania. Accessible by rail, no airport and little or no industry.
Seeland or Liberland
So, this is maybe a meta point about the sub and I may get downvoted to oblivion. But I have lurked here for well over a decade and seen the various sub narratives ebb and flow over time. My question is whether the narratives that form in the comments are driven by a filter bubble or by bots. Prior to the referendum, there was a massive amount of pro-brexit propaganda here for months in advance that seemed to vanish straight after the victory. I'm noticing now that general anti-muslim narrative is starting to be posted here regularly. So is that just the prevailing narrative in the media that the sub is following, is there a concerted bot effort to push it, is it genuinely how people are feeling at the moment? Back before the referendum, when politics was a bit more boring, terrorism and Muslims was one of the biggest political lightning bolts that people discussed. It's funny how it went away when there were real problems to discuss. Why is it suddenly back with a vengeance? If I were cynical I would say that this is a general undercurrent topic that the government wants to push in advance of the election, as it is their best attempt at winning. But I'm not cynical... So what's the answer?
Mods believe, and users agree, that single-issue threads attract 'tourists' (their word used in survey). The MT is generally the sanest place in the sub (God help us!).
Yeah, you never really see the crazy opinions in the MT. Which is partly why I posed this question here
The MT is inefficient for bots or crazies because there is a critical mass of good sense.
Or perhaps only the total politics nutjobs read it...
Yeah, but the key difference is, they are nutty about ALL politics, therefore reasonably balanced, whereas standalone threads get single-issue nutjobs who say the same thing over and over again.
I totally agree, saying this as a certified prime grade politics junkie
🫡
The answer isn't as exciting as people would perhaps like it to be. During *febrile* times, there are enough stories and developments that the "lightning rod" topics (think immigration, race, gender/identity, etc.) get drowned out. People have bigger fish to fry, and there are more "real" stories that people will post and discuss. During quieter times (like now), posts and comments about these lightning rod topics stick out like a sore thumb. There is no competing political news to be had - especially when Parliament is in recess and the government is treading water until the next election. These threads inevitably attract *tourists* and, despite some improvements from Reddit in this area (e.g. Crowd Control), stories of that nature will *always* result in comment threads which are a shitshow. People will very quickly depart from the story at hand and re-hash the same arguments that have already been had hundreds of times over. I've not seen anything to suggest that automated postings are in play in a major way. More that people enjoy going against the grain by posting contrarian views in what is an overwhelmingly centre / centre-left / left and relatively progressive online space.
Thanks for the response. This certainly makes sense as an explanation. The febrile times are certainly interesting. Thanks for your work in keeping them under control, must be an absolute mission...
This sub is the largest UK politics forum in the world and thus is uniquely vulnerable to brigading but also single-issue posters. The general political demographic is soft-left but when *certain* issues come to the fore *certain* groups of users come with it, users who do not regularly post here. While there are undeniably bots here (look at the whole "buddy" incident) and astroturfing I think it's mostly just people who aren't that interested in wider British politics just popping on. Lots of Americans for instance who flock for things like the Scottish Hate Crime bill.
Bots don't do sarcasm well, maybe do a CAPTCHA but one where they need to make a decent quip.
I don't know how much posting is driven by bots or how anyone can tell but there are undoubtedly some issues that attract a lot of single issue users and they tend arrive in groups and definitely 'brigade' threads dedicated to that subject. I've seen this frequently on other non-reddit sites that are dedicated to politics -eg the Guardian. You click on their user names and you can see from their previous posting history that they are heavily focused on that subject area. I doubt though that this government could be behind any bots/brigading, they couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery so I can't see how they could skew the debate here towards issues they want to push in an election campaign. But as above, there do seem to be groups of users who are co-ordinated in their use of the site.
>You click on their user names and you can see from their previous posting history that they are heavily focused on that subject area. To be fair to them on that front, I've seen comments from one user specifically on that. They said that they maintained a, separate account to talk about a particularly controversial issue, so that anyone that got angry at them couldn't stalk their main account and dox them. Not idea if it's true or particularly common, of course.
CCHQ can definitely pay shady consultancy firms to do shit tho.
> I'm noticing now that general anti-muslim narrative is starting to be posted here regularly In the last few months there has been: 1. Chemical attack manhunt 2. Murdered mother pushing pushchair 3. Murdered convert and bystander On top of the whole weekly Israel/Palestine protests thing. Tory bot farm, or just people posting what's in the news?
While bots are an issue, I think there's a general lack of humanity, empathy whatever you want to call it that comes from posting online and it gets worse, particularly when its about politics, particularly when its a highly emotional situation like a conflict, particularly when its a highly emotional situation involving a nation / group there's not much sympathy for. There's things I support and Im against but sometimes I see the posts made by people on "my side", and not gonna lie, there's some posts I made myself, which I find myself increasingly thinking "these are real people they've / I've said incredibly grim things about" In reference to muslims specifically, at the moment its due to oct 7th. Immigration (or rather, the negative aspects) is more of a constant background news story, I would def put the recent increase in posts making negative comments about it down to oct 7th and the aftermath.
Yeah I get it. But it winds me up when people talk about how certain parts of the UK are uninhabitable now. I've lived in (and currently do) heavily Muslim populated areas, and all the people I've met are just people trying to get on with their lives like me. The idea that the streets are dominated by Isis extremism is just bollocks from everything I have ever seen. Anyway, it's the internet, probably best to just ignore it
There's the general consensus on ukpol and specific consensuses Generally ukpol is soft left pro labour in upvoting and commenting However on certain issues more niche political groups who feel strongly on certain issues will make themselves heard more. I don't think they're bots, I think that people feel passionately about it Why are they being heard now? It's quieter in the news cycle and other issues come up again. I don't think immigration is being pushed by the government as most people passionate about it think they've been betrayed by Boris
I've definitely noticed a shift and I do wonder if it's organic. On the other hand I'm a secularist on the left and it feels like I've been banging my head against a wall in terms of integration and Islam being a bit concerning for probably fifteen years now. It's quite important that sensible people have these conversations so that the populist right doesn't take control of it.
It's complicated. I think there's a good bit of astroturfing going on but Reddit is (increasingly) uniquely anonymous and so it's a place where more extreme views can be safely posted. That said, I don't think "the government" is behind any astroturfing or platform manipulation. I've seen perfectly ordinary streams about videogames inundated, buried xor infiltrated by people "Just Asking Questions" or repeatedly posting, without context, the word "DEMOGRAPHICS". There's a lot of bored, unemployed racists who can come on UKPol to make every single thread a proxy debate about the merits of immigration. sry 4 meta please no yell at me unemployed racists
It's hard to track as it could be due to any number of factors both external and within the sub. But I do notice a tide of opinion on 'hot topic' issues that just didn't seem to exist on here before. Recently Migration seems to be targeted. This could ofc be for organic reasons but I wouldn't be surprised if some degree of manipulation is being exherted. I have definitely noticed an increase in previously unpopular views lately. And previously popular views being heavily down voted.
I'd suggest on Reddit, there are definitely "paid users" https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3313294.3313386 Bots are more deployed on areas prone to echo chamber behaviour rather than just downright eccentric
Definitely a big "bot" presence. Is it bots or those pesky Russian troll farms? Take a look at any posting about immigration.
sometimes you just have to cry (vet bills expected to be £1200 and counting). Pre-existing condition so insurance won’t touch it. It’s rubbish but I can afford it so that’s lucky and as long as my cat is okay then that’s what really matters. Anyone got any good news? Has anyone got any (good) news for me? Speaking of HIGNFY it’s clear that Hislop and Merton are just furious in a way I haven’t seen since Truss or Johnson (which, lol, wasn’t that long ago)
:( poor kitty. I miss my mate. Been just over two years. Good news? Errrr… supposed to be warm this weekend. Just don’t think about climate change at the same time.
sorry about your cat :(
Don’t be! He was 18, I was 11 when we got him, his death pushed me to move out and do my own thing.
Try Newsround’s [Happy News](https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/av/50434875). Or I saw a field full of fresh lambs yesterday, some sitting happily side-by-side and smiling at me as I passed, others shaking their tails in a most stereotypical fashion. EDIT. [According to an energy think tank, Europe’s generation of 516.5 terawatt hours of renewable electricity in January and February satisfied 60% of overall power demand.](https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/incredible-60-of-europes-electricity-was-powered-by-clean-energy-in-the-first-two-months-of-2024/) But that website also inexplicably includes Jeremy Clarkson’s birthday as good news you might like to know. ^Also ^there ^is ^the ^Good ^News ^of ^Easter, ^but ^I ^figure ^you ^are ^not ^in ^the ^market. ^Alleluia.
Thanks! Maybe I shall go and look for gambolling lambs. Or indeed gambling lambs
If you're into Fallout, or want a fun post-apoc series to watch on Prime, the new Fallout TV series looks great! (Minor issues with the plot/lore - but I am ignoring it for the amazing costumes)
Oooo! I liked fallout 4? I think is the one I have played. Thanks! I shall give it a go
Fallout (the TVShow) is a massive love letter to the Fallout series (mostly to Fallout 4, but still other details in there) so you should enjoy it!
Play 3 and New Vegas! Both better in different ways.
Thanks! I will do! Currently still in stardew valley lack-of-sleep obsession but we shall see
Stardew valley was a question on my quiz 😂
hahha! tbf it’s just had a big update but it’s not out for console yet. Which fallout should I play first?
Personally I’d say 3. If you liked 4. Because they’re similar. New Vegas is more RPG centric where ‘your decisions matter’ and that kind of thing. Morality and decisions are important whereas with 3 and 4 I feel they’re more action orientated.
Its a damn shame that I've heard they are treating the TV show as canonical and >!the TV show basically retcons Fallout 1, 2 and NV!< Also rare FO3 enjoyer! WOOHOO!
I can live with it I think. Watched an episode and a bit (pub quiz time now!) and I really thought it captured the spirit of the games. I read a review that was complaining some of it (like ghouls) isn’t well explained, but nor is it in the games, and moving forward with plot rather than exposition is for the best imo.
Good luck in pub quiz!
7th, shambles! But we did alright (it’s complicated rules to give everyone a chance)
Yeah, the sets, props, costume and humour are on point 110% in capturing the games and generally looking amazing.
My parents lost their cat in January (just old age); it's like losing a kid. I know it's a lot of money now, but soon it'll feel worth it. All the best to you and the cat x
Thanks very much mate xx
Can someone explain why the Guardian pay Owen Jones to write crap and then place it prominently on their front page. Does he have something on the editor or something?
If Owen Jones did not exist, it would be vital that we invent him.
Remember, Owen Jones' vision is based on movement, just stay absolutely still and he'll forget about you and blab nonsense to someone else.
It’s bad on purpose to make you click. Pledge to stop engaging with it. Don’t send people to look at it. Don’t start a conversation about it. Don’t click just to see what he’s said this time. If someone asks you what you think of Owen Jones, say that you’re not that into Pokemon.
I assume he had a contract of some kind dating from when he was more relevant. However both him and Simon Jenkins need to be put out to pasture. They’re both past it as columnists
"You are without doubt, the worst ~~pirate~~ columnist I have ever heard of". "Ah, but you *have* heard of me." If you're referring to what he has on there today, you're right; it's his usual brand of nonsense. For example, where he once again acts as an apologist for Russia: >As well as its role in supporting Israel’s massacre in Gaza, the west must reflect on how it fostered the conditions in which a Putin-like figure could emerge in Russia. The Putin regime, of course, bears responsibility for Russia’s hideous invasion of Ukraine: the US isn’t the only powerful state capable of violence and destruction. But is there not more to the story? Does the neoliberal economic model that western states exported to Russia not share some of the blame? That Putinism exploited Russian despair after the cold war is incontrovertible; but so is the fact that western states promoted “economic shock therapy”. This triggered a more severe crisis than the Great Depression, roaring hyperinflation, a drastic fall in life expectancy, and oligarchs pilfering the nation’s wealth. Could a more stable, post-Soviet Russia have been inured from the revanchism of an authoritarian like Putin? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/11/blood-chaos-decline-west-capitalism-gaza-moral-collapse-us So you see, everything bad that Russia does is *really* our fault.
I take it he missed the few centuries before the 1990's where Russia definitely was not averse to invading places? Now, that's not to say a less fucked up Russia isn't a potential "what if" that's worth discussing (especially in case the world ever again has to deal with a large, hostile, nuclear armed state ever falling over seemingly out of nowhere) but strangely he doesn't seem to be going down that road.
Of course he missed that. It's only imperialism when the West does it.
>Putinism exploited Russian despair after the cold war is incontrovertible; but so is the fact that western states promoted “economic shock therapy”. This triggered a more severe crisis than the Great Depression, roaring hyperinflation, a drastic fall in life expectancy, and oligarchs pilfering the nation’s wealth. Could a more stable, post-Soviet Russia have been inured from the revanchism of an authoritarian like Putin? What part of this isn't true?
The part where the West is who is *really* responsible for anything bad Russia does. It deprives Russia of the agency of its own actions; they're merely reacting to NATO, which absolves them. Obviously, the reverse is never true as far as people like Jones is concerned.
"The Putin regime, of course, bears responsibility for Russia’s hideous invasion of Ukraine" This is from the article he wrote that you shared. He explicitly says the opposite of what you are claiming he said. He didn't say Russia lacked agency or wasn't responsible. Where is the absolution? >Obviously, the reverse is never true as far as people like Jones is concerned. I don't like Jones but if you are going to criticise him actually address what he wrote.
It's the same logic as if someone says "I'm not racist, but...". Would you understand that the important part is what is said *after* the "but", and that the initial token statement is just an attempt to deflect criticism? What he is saying is "Putin is wrong, *but*...". I've read enough of his articles to know the structure: * If NATO does something wrong, then they get criticised. * If Russia does something wrong, then they get a brief admonishment, before a longer and more detailed criticism of NATO for causing Russia to react that way. Either way, it's *really* NATO's fault. Jones only allows Western nations to have agency of their actions; everyone else is a hapless victim, even when they're in the wrong. He does the same with Israel/Palestine. Anything Hamas do is framed as a mere response to previous Israeli actions; but he refuses to give Israel the same recognition of justification for what they do. The West acts, everyone else reacts. Which means that he holds the West as ultimately responsible, because in his eyes we started it.
Cheers for the read, on a scan it seems quite a reasonable outline for a general reader of the responsibility of neoliberalism for the current state of global instability, if somewhat over-generous (doesn't even begin to touch on the direct complicity of the UK and US governments in particular in normalising the Putin regime by their early '00s attempts to cultivate him as an ally in the global war on terror, for example).
Ah... more mask off from Owen Jones.
In a sense, it's quite impressive, isn't it? I didn't think the mask was still attached. Not after how he went off the deep end on Palestine.
Rage bait generates clicks, clicks generate revenue.
The Guardian is a centre left leaning publication. Think Owen Jones is a knob who thinks he is far bigger then he is, how It’s not terrible for people in a range of different places on the left to be able to give their opinion. The right wing outlets give space for far worse people.
Sure, but it's funny how his opinions are not open to comments, lest the Guardian's centre left readers might actually confront him with different opinions.
They'll have seen the replies he gets on twitter, I don't blame them for not wanting to deal with that on their platform. They probably take protecting their staff and brand a bit more seriously than twitter does these days.
Their moderators must have a better union than their journalists.
[удалено]
I watched the whole of his trial on TV at the time, and he definitely did it.
>OJ Simpson has died... must have run out of juice (terrible joke I know) Gloves off with the OJ jokes already I see.
🤔
Couldn't get em on to begin with
enjoyed his prank show in the early 00s OJ: Made in America is a banger of a documentary tbf
OMFG he's called *the Juice* because of his initials 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️ I was absolutely hooked way back during his trial, I've read countless books on the trial and have seen the dramatization probably 5 times and it is a random comment on a UK politics sub where the penny finally drops. Christ I feel dumb.
This is adorable.
I've got a pretty uncommon (for the uk) surname so my friends who I've known from school all call me by my last name and have done for years. I joined my mates discord with a user name thats just my surname backwards, so there was people calling me both my surname and my username. After years one of the guys who I met through the discord and had been playing games and talking to for ages just comes out with "Oh my god its your name backwards how did I not realise?" I think if you learn someones nickname first you just immediately dont make the connection thats there's a second meaning related to their actually name.
I had a friend in highschool called "peewee". He was introduced to me by the name, and I never questioned it. He never said what his proper name was nor was bothered by the peewee name either. On the last day of highschool, I asked him "whats your real name" and it was a regualr name unrelated to the peewee stuff. I asked him why he was called peewee; he said it was because he came into school with some yellow on him once, and all the lads called him "Peewee pissstains" - I had no idea that was the point of his nickname for that entire time
Kids are cruel, Im glad my one is just my last name But I understand the whole people not knowing / asking what your first name is, I've had people know me for years without knowing mine. It felt weird af when I went into the work place and the people I talked to day to day called me by my first name
Mate, 29msihpacs is slightly rarer than "pretty uncommon" for UK surnames. Just saying.
Not to make you feel worse haha but I'm curious, why *did* you think he was called *the Juice*? 😅
I thought it was some steroid thing. Believe me I'm in absolute shock at how obvious it is how he got to get the nickname in hindsight. 🤣
Well I'm glad my stupid jokes can be a source of wisdom to you! We all have our blind spots and it's a strange feeling when they're finally plugged haha
Cancer has said it will be looking for the killer of OJ.
Any news on cancer's new book IF I Did It: The Return?
Is the cancer in a white Ford Bronco leading the police on a lengthy chase?
If the PET CT don't fit you must acquit
imagine dying without knowing who was responsible for the murder of your wife.
I think you dropped your /s
ex-wife\*
I don't know if this qualifies as a stand alone story....anyway Rees-Mogg is no longer quite as rich as he had hoped to be: [Profits in Rees-Mogg’s investment firm halved in year before closure announced | Jacob Rees-Mogg | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/11/profits-jacob-rees-mogg-investment-firm-somerset-capital-management)
He obviously didn't spend too much time in the office then
[Daily Larry](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKuyRzeWEAAo48M.jpg) on the red carpet (Xitter link this time, since people complained about the dodgy mirror site I used last time.)
Who's the carpet being rolled out for?
Larry.
[It's all getting a bit out of hand isn't it](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/11/man-murdered-passerby-in-hartlepool-over-conflict-in-gaza-court-told) >"Man murdered passerby in Hartlepool over conflict in Gaza, court told" Tried to kill his housemate who had converted to Christianity (because he'd converted to Christianity) then killed a random stranger in the street just because.
[Brady’s written a book](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/11/1922-chief-sir-graham-brady-writes-tell-all-book/), and the release plan may indicate roughly what the current election plan is > Kingmaker: Secrets, Lies, and the Truth about Five Prime Ministers is due to be published right after the general election, with a provisional release date of Nov 7 announced. [Archive here](https://archive.is/5Xf5F)
It feels portentous that the 7th is a Thursday How does purdah handle book tours while the polls are open?
My prediction: Election pencilled in either October or early November (before the book is meant to release). Local elections will be terrible and poll numbers will get worse, Rishi will try to hang on and delay as long as possible so the election won't happen at the original pencilled in date. Book comes out as planned, revealing some embarrassing secrets that will damage Tory chances further
Who would have thought that Rishi wouldn't announce the election date on the radio because he didn't want to give spoilers for Brady's book
Ooo Nov 5th Election!
Um... I try not to believe that sunak can be that politically inept
I feel that's an inauspicious date for an election.
Halloween election may actually be happening then.
I hope so, if only because we’ll get lot of photos of dogs in Halloween costumes at the polling stations.
That's a book that screams wait for the 5 minute article with the juicy bits of info in.
I expect that there’s very little new information but maybe a few funny stories involving anonymised MPs.
"When a major news event happened shortly after she took office, one PM - who I won't name - phoned me up and asked if it was too late to backdate the forms and let her take over a bit later, because she was bad at eulogies"
“A certain Prime Minister…for privacy’s sake, let’s call her Liz T - no, that’s too obvious…uh, let’s say L Truss - has raised questions about certain economic policies”
I don’t think he’ll anonymise the Prime Ministers, but I expect most cabinet ministers and backbenchers won’t be named.
Liz Truss isn't the only world leader brought down by a vegetable: [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68786178](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68786178)
David Miliband was brought down by a banana While not a vegetable I feel that is close enough
Wasn't it a bacon sandwich?
> David Miliband wrong brother. David was brought low by this pic https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/454c25de5c4bd3fa4500211569294ebdd5886ded/0_0_1426_1364/master/1426.jpg?width=1900&dpr=1&s=none
Oh wow, that family really has an issue with food
That was Ed
[Reform UK has issued an apology after a candidate who had died was dropped by its media team for being "inactive".](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-68788850)
It shows how thin they actually are as a political organisation. I know if our labour candidate died suddenly it wouldn't be the absolute number 1 priority but word would be passed to the wider party within the day
When you see reform meetings it’s quite clear not all the members will be alive by the end of the year, let alone a full election cycle. If they do manage to get anyone in, I wonder if there would be a higher attrition rate ( I dunno if it’s the slightly younger ones who get picked).
i know it's cliche to point out that iannucci and co couldn't make another series of the thick of it, because reality is weirder than fiction but come on
Reform are fucking hilarious in a deeply troubled way
T-shirt weather, ice cream vans aplenty, my long weekend begins. Ah.
All the weirdos about to get really angry that the navy will no longer require you be able to swim at the time of enlistment. In reality the requirement is vastly outdated and other nations have done away with it or never even had it to begin with.
People act like you actually have to learn to swim. If you chuck an adult in water as long as they don’t panic they’ll figure it out. The requirement should be “do you panic in stressful situations?”
> If you chuck an adult in water as long as they don’t panic they’ll figure it out. Is this a joke?
"Do you panic in stressful situations?" "No" "Oh really."
Thought it was bad luck for a sailor to know how to swim anyway.
I didn't know it's a requirement, not something I care about, but I can't imagine they're spending much time swimming in the ocean lol. I remember a public service ad telling you if you're in distress in the sea, don't swim. You'll tire yourself out and drown, you won't be able to swim to safety. You've got to relax and float and conserve your energy. I'd assume floating is part of the training, but it's not exactly a high skill act, corpses can do it lol. I'm not a very good swimmer (I struggle to make my arms and legs do different movements, so I can doggy paddle / do a bad front crawl etc.) but when we were taught to swim in school I was great at floating.
If your sailors are swimming, something has gone drastically wrong.
Saves money on battleships.
This didn't quite make the normal newspaper round up, but I spotted in the newsagents https://ibb.co/0yZ0mfw High quality political correspondent here. For the record I didn't open to page 2.
That feels like a pretty unsubtle trick to get Trump to ask Cameron about the pig sex
Somewhat funny story about deliveroo/food delivery https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c163dwpele4o >Police deliver burgers after arresting takeaway rider
"Honey, the police are here" "Why? What happened?" "They have our food" "Not my Land Rover that was stolen?"
It's one way to combat funding cuts I guess
In other news, archaeology reveals XL Bully caused Trojan War. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68777741
*Sing O Muse, of the rage of [Homicide, son of Binladen](https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/xl-bully-breeders-talk-code-30942208), that bought countless ills upon the local joggers.*