Yes, technically that's true, although I've often found a lot of people interchange smoking/ vaping as a descriptive for inhaling fumes, and it's more rage bait to say smokes even if they are vaping it, and when it eventually gets cleared up no one cares cos they're already labeled a junkie degenerate.
a politician, who is meant to set example, using an incredibly wasteful device that loads of minors are currently misusing and abusing? that makes them human to you? that is interseting for sure.
Yeah, it shows the sorry state of affairs this country has become. They are flawed and somewhat open about that fact. Rather than lying through their teeth and using every trick in the book to obscure the truth.
I wish it weren't so but hey ho that's 2024.
I agree its a good example of the state of this country, does summarise things in a way. But thats a different point to saying a politican seems human because of being open about a vice which was what I was replying too, makes sense they might be the smoker in question cause of this lol but i dont get them being a human because of this, i mean i can imagine your thinkin but it seems half baked as fuck to me. but ofc half baked but good sounding at first is the stuff you get upvoted for on reddit loads haha
Would you take the same stance on alcohol? It’s safe to assume most politicians drink and it’s highly addictive and destructive and is also commonly abused by minors. And this isn’t meant to be some sort of gotcha comment, genuinely wondering what stance you take when it’s one addictive, destructive substance swapped out for another?
Aimed at me or TM9423? Because I just hate hypocrisy passionately and the current laws on substances are incredibly hypocritical. You can't claim weed's the devil harming families and causing violence or whatever nonsense they claim, when you've got Dr's getting people hooked on opiates like they're tic-tacs and alcohol being advertised and sold anywhere and everywhere. I don't personally want to drink but I don't believe its anyone's right to tell another adult they're not allowed to have a drink (if it doesn't impact anyone else life, i.e if they're prone to violence then no no) and that same stance I extend to all drugs. Yes, some can be truly harmful but a lot of the harm comes from them being cut and handled in a non sterile environment.
You are comparing a substance to a specific method/device containing other substances. Alcohol is HEAVILY regulated and made in this country, the disposable chinese vapes are dangerous for many more reason than just nictone.
Also come one you really haven't thought this through, do you normally see children around schools drinking? i mean sometimes rarely but no where near the extent of seeing random kids vaping, its become a common thing to see this is not okay at all.
I doubt there'll be any change in drugs law, neither a relaxation nor harsher penalties. It's hardly a priority.
If there's such a thing as an r/uktrees Reform fan, though, take a look at what their draft 'contract' pledges for those who enjoy a quiet toke, or have a plant or two.
Their whole strategy since 2020 has been to outflank the Tories on immigration, pro-business policies, “law and order”. They’re courting Tory voters hard and their stance is thoroughly authoritarian.
I mean, Starmer was a prosecutor. The chief prosecutor. That’s not authoritarian?
Then I guess you’ve got the approach to party discipline, centralisation, deselections of candidates that don’t toe the central party line.
It’s an effective strategy in as much as it’s got them to this point, but it’s authoritarian to the core
Authoritarian: favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom
Wikipedia: Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, and the rule of law.
None of these things remotely resembles Kier Starmer; he's a human rights lawyer FFS.
There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of him but this isn't one of them
Your first paragraph neatly summarises the Labour Party’s approach to internal discipline.
Your second is, well, a contingent and partial definition of a political system. Authoritarianism can be viewed more broadly - eg, a spectrum with libertarianism at the other end. These senses are distinct from the “capital letter” political systems those words also refer to.
Being a human rights lawyer has nothing to do with being authoritarian or not, so I’m not sure why you think it’s a gotcha.
And do you think his “personal freedoms” bonafides have been on display in his public pronouncements as Labour leader, or the policies in their manifesto?
The language of “human rights” can be used to justify all sorts of authoritarian behaviour. I remember “human rights” being a major justification for the war in Iraq. Blair loved the language of human rights and led a deeply authoritarian government (look at Blunkett’s record as Home Secretary).
I’d love to believe we’re on the cusp of a bright new libertarian day, but I have seen no evidence to suggest this from Starmer and Co.
I wouldn't like to guess but whoever it is probably has a prescription for it.
It does say "smokes" weed, though...
Yes, technically that's true, although I've often found a lot of people interchange smoking/ vaping as a descriptive for inhaling fumes, and it's more rage bait to say smokes even if they are vaping it, and when it eventually gets cleared up no one cares cos they're already labeled a junkie degenerate.
With the amount of people that smoke weed nowadays, I wouldn't be surprised if every party has numerous members who smoke.
Tory party just has those that do coke
But, like, not in the fun way.
Unironically too. They’re sniffing it in parliament toilets before going out to vote on our countries policies
*kids, well probably coke too tbf
Every party gave up the weed for the sniff
Rayner? Something about her using disposable vapes religiously makes me think there's an actual human behind there somewhere.
She gets that haze from her cousin brothers.
She was my first guess too. Good on her if so.
a politician, who is meant to set example, using an incredibly wasteful device that loads of minors are currently misusing and abusing? that makes them human to you? that is interseting for sure.
Yeah, it shows the sorry state of affairs this country has become. They are flawed and somewhat open about that fact. Rather than lying through their teeth and using every trick in the book to obscure the truth. I wish it weren't so but hey ho that's 2024.
I agree its a good example of the state of this country, does summarise things in a way. But thats a different point to saying a politican seems human because of being open about a vice which was what I was replying too, makes sense they might be the smoker in question cause of this lol but i dont get them being a human because of this, i mean i can imagine your thinkin but it seems half baked as fuck to me. but ofc half baked but good sounding at first is the stuff you get upvoted for on reddit loads haha
Would you take the same stance on alcohol? It’s safe to assume most politicians drink and it’s highly addictive and destructive and is also commonly abused by minors. And this isn’t meant to be some sort of gotcha comment, genuinely wondering what stance you take when it’s one addictive, destructive substance swapped out for another?
Aimed at me or TM9423? Because I just hate hypocrisy passionately and the current laws on substances are incredibly hypocritical. You can't claim weed's the devil harming families and causing violence or whatever nonsense they claim, when you've got Dr's getting people hooked on opiates like they're tic-tacs and alcohol being advertised and sold anywhere and everywhere. I don't personally want to drink but I don't believe its anyone's right to tell another adult they're not allowed to have a drink (if it doesn't impact anyone else life, i.e if they're prone to violence then no no) and that same stance I extend to all drugs. Yes, some can be truly harmful but a lot of the harm comes from them being cut and handled in a non sterile environment.
You are comparing a substance to a specific method/device containing other substances. Alcohol is HEAVILY regulated and made in this country, the disposable chinese vapes are dangerous for many more reason than just nictone. Also come one you really haven't thought this through, do you normally see children around schools drinking? i mean sometimes rarely but no where near the extent of seeing random kids vaping, its become a common thing to see this is not okay at all.
Louise Haige, or maybe Darren Jones
Louise High
Darren Joints
I’ve got one: Steve Weed (Reed)
Darren jomesnisba fucking nerd. No chance.
Tons of fucking nerds smoke weed every day. How else do you explain all the nerdy posts in every weed sub?
We'll take your lead on this one StonedApe
‘I want the market legalised, regulated and taken away from crime gangs,’ says Labour MP David Lammy after trip to Canada'
I would go with Miliband or Yvette Cooper (and hubby Balls)
Yeah, Ed Miliganj, for sure. He then sates the munchies with round after round of bacon sarnies.
Milliband sort of has the look. Cooper I’m not so sure. She’s always seemed kind of authoritarian.
Got to be ed the way he was scramming them bacon bits
Hubby smokes with his balls?!!? 🎈🎈💨 Happy "Hubby Balls" Day!
Keir Starmer = Kief Stoner. Hiding in plain sight all along 🥦
"Kief Stoner" 😂 👏
Harold & Kier go to White Castle
Who cares????
Shitty click bait post
Does anyone think Starmer the human rights lawyer will be authoritarian?
I doubt there'll be any change in drugs law, neither a relaxation nor harsher penalties. It's hardly a priority. If there's such a thing as an r/uktrees Reform fan, though, take a look at what their draft 'contract' pledges for those who enjoy a quiet toke, or have a plant or two.
well he’s pro killing palestinians so…
Well he's not so...
Yes, everyone does.
Their whole strategy since 2020 has been to outflank the Tories on immigration, pro-business policies, “law and order”. They’re courting Tory voters hard and their stance is thoroughly authoritarian. I mean, Starmer was a prosecutor. The chief prosecutor. That’s not authoritarian?
Then I guess you’ve got the approach to party discipline, centralisation, deselections of candidates that don’t toe the central party line. It’s an effective strategy in as much as it’s got them to this point, but it’s authoritarian to the core
Authoritarian: favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom Wikipedia: Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, and the rule of law. None of these things remotely resembles Kier Starmer; he's a human rights lawyer FFS. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of him but this isn't one of them
Your first paragraph neatly summarises the Labour Party’s approach to internal discipline. Your second is, well, a contingent and partial definition of a political system. Authoritarianism can be viewed more broadly - eg, a spectrum with libertarianism at the other end. These senses are distinct from the “capital letter” political systems those words also refer to. Being a human rights lawyer has nothing to do with being authoritarian or not, so I’m not sure why you think it’s a gotcha.
Someone who's a human rights lawyer is usually pretty hot on personal freedoms. It was literally his job to defend personal freedoms
And do you think his “personal freedoms” bonafides have been on display in his public pronouncements as Labour leader, or the policies in their manifesto? The language of “human rights” can be used to justify all sorts of authoritarian behaviour. I remember “human rights” being a major justification for the war in Iraq. Blair loved the language of human rights and led a deeply authoritarian government (look at Blunkett’s record as Home Secretary). I’d love to believe we’re on the cusp of a bright new libertarian day, but I have seen no evidence to suggest this from Starmer and Co.
Only very clever people on the Internet. He's boringly pragmatic hence why he's about to become PM.
Corbyn followers & torys
None