Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[MartyFunkhouser]

The proof is going to be in the 3 year pudding but there is a level of humility and down to Earth thats endearing with Burnham

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Gutter Boy]

The proof is going to be in the 3 year pudding but there is a level of humility and down to Earth thats endearing with Burnham

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

He definitely has that affability about him that few politicians manage. Ken Clarke is about the only other that comes to mind

He needs to get on with that promise of reversing Thatcherism/neo-liberalism if he's going to stand any hope though

 

[Jurgen the German]

It’s not really difficult. Racists don’t like being called racist and want to say racist things without being called out for it. When they are called out for it, they complain it’s against free speech.

Sometimes, yes, so I partially agree. But I do think you've oversimplified the issue.

Free speech isn't just about defending someone's right to say offensive or racist things. It's a much broader principle. It's about protecting everyone's ability to express opinions, criticise those in power, debate difficult issues, and challenge prevailing ideas without fearing state punishment.

That's why I'm uncomfortable with people being jailed over tweets. Unless speech crosses the line into criminal conduct—such as directly inciting violence or intentionally encouraging hatred in a way the law recognises—I don't think the government should be imprisoning people for expressing opinions, however unpopular or offensive they may be.

Free speech is important because the same powers used against views we dislike today can be used against views we support tomorrow. A society that allows open debate is more likely to expose bad ideas, correct mistakes, and hold governments accountable than one that relies on censorship or criminal sanctions. The answer to bad speech is often better speech, not more state intervention.

The broader question for me is why the political left no longer seems to treat free speech as a fundamental civil liberty in the way it once did. Historically, many on the left were among its strongest defenders because they recognised that the ability to challenge authority and express dissent protects minorities, campaigners, trade unions, journalists, and political opponents alike. It seems that, for some, preventing harmful speech has increasingly taken precedence over protecting free expression, and I'm not convinced that's a healthy shift for a liberal democracy.

 

[LutonSpurs]

Sometimes, yes, so I partially agree. But I do think you've oversimplified the issue.

Free speech isn't just about defending someone's right to say offensive or racist things. It's a much broader principle. It's about protecting everyone's ability to express opinions, criticise those in power, debate difficult issues, and challenge prevailing ideas without fearing state punishment.

That's why I'm uncomfortable with people being jailed over tweets. Unless speech crosses the line into criminal conduct—such as directly inciting violence or intentionally encouraging hatred in a way the law recognises—I don't think the government should be imprisoning people for expressing opinions, however unpopular or offensive they may be.

Free speech is important because the same powers used against views we dislike today can be used against views we support tomorrow. A society that allows open debate is more likely to expose bad ideas, correct mistakes, and hold governments accountable than one that relies on censorship or criminal sanctions. The answer to bad speech is often better speech, not more state intervention.

The broader question for me is why the political left no longer seems to treat free speech as a fundamental civil liberty in the way it once did. Historically, many on the left were among its strongest defenders because they recognised that the ability to challenge authority and express dissent protects minorities, campaigners, trade unions, journalists, and political opponents alike. It seems that, for some, preventing harmful speech has increasingly taken precedence over protecting free expression, and I'm not convinced that's a healthy shift for a liberal democracy.

When has anyone been jailed for tweeting something non criminal?

 

[Jurgen the German]

When has anyone been jailed for tweeting something non criminal?

Not for a non-criminal tweet. However, people have been convicted under the Communications Act for posts such as the Count Dankula case I mentioned previously. As I said in my earlier post, it seems that, for some, the priority is preventing speech they consider harmful rather than protecting freedom of expression.

Even the Conservatives were at it when they were in power. Nadine Dorries suggested that Netflix should face tighter regulation and greater legal accountability over controversial content, following the backlash to a Jimmy Carr comedy special. Just when I thought I couldn't dislike that woman any more.

If you don't like the content, don't watch it. It's really that simple.

 

[thfcsteff]

I apologise in advance because I know the point you were making here and very broadly I agree with it, but I’m going to potentially misquote or misrepresent you here to make my own point (hey, it’s the politics thread after all! Would we be politicking if we were putting words in each others mouths!)

However, I’d love to think with age comes wisdom and education and understanding. I’m really starting to doubt it though.

I drove through Frinton on Sea this morning, and of course I spend all of my time telling you all not to judge my town up the road in Clacton based on the actions of a few of its voters.. but the amount of ‘Vote Reform’ signs outside of the bungalows all owned by people around there of likely 50+ years and I just felt a massive disbelief.

How, HOW are people still falling for this? They’ve fallen for it with Farage time and time again. Their age has not improved things at all. The best educator and source of wisdom for me is actually an open mind and being willing to reflect and be challenged. What these people show is that it does not matter what someone does, if it allows them to be the person they really are they go all in. I genuinely believe Farage could visit houses round here and murder peoples children’s in their beds and the next day on the news the parents would be saying “well I’ll still vote for him, after all he isn’t the first murderer is he” it just baffles me.

If you’re voting for him with all the coverage, with all the evidence of his lies, his corruption and everything else that shows you that this man is not your friend then I’m sorry, it’s indefensible. It just shows that the mask is off, you are voting for a one policy party and it’s because you want to be surrounded by white folk (in a 95% white constituency by the way). I’ve been online lately doing so much defending of Clacton because we all get grouped together as the racist little town with Farage - but honestly when (hopefully only if) he wins again, my neighbours will have shown me what they are.

I really thought we had made big strides on racism, it’s so so disappointing to see where this country is headed, almost as if history hasn’t provided any lessons - but at this point age isn’t a sign of wisdom and education for many, it’s a sign of deeply ingrained racism, bred in the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s and just shows me that actually we aren’t much further forward at all. We aren’t progressing as a species or as a nation.

They have successfully divided this country between apathy and wilful ignorance prance. I’m just… so fed up with society at the minute.

(Sorry Steff, have hijacked 0.02% of what you said and put more than a pennies worth in!)

No apologies at all mate, it's great to have discussions like this, and I find myself agreeing with a lot of what you're saying too.

Perhaps I make too many excuses for too many people?
It is possible.
I think fear, anxiety and anger are such powerful tools that they can become all-encompassing and cause much internal and external blindness.
For me personally, I think this cycle is sadly locked for several more years, and I find myself wanting to know where we can go once it breaks in a few years, how we can circumvent the enormous power (and effective employment of) fear, anger, and ignorance to show people the true path forward as opposed to this circle-jerking fu-ckfest of hate, war and intolerance we find ourselves in. I cling to the belief that many people are much better than they are displaying as, and that there are a lot of scared people looking for easy helpings of hope and salvation, to the point they are prepared to sacrifice humanity in order to achieve immediate relief. It's ugly. There are, of course, also just racist scum and wan-kers. They speak for themselves.

Again, thanks for using my post as a springboard for some great thoughts and conversation.

 

[robp135]

When has anyone been jailed for tweeting something non criminal?

Graham Linehan will probably be the first.