[thread]

I want to write a thread with a simple theme

One from a sad day four years ago

We all have more in common

There are people who want divisive culture wars

And those who don't

Pick a side

Actually scrub that

Imagine there are no

Now I am going to make it clear at the start

I did not vote for Boris Johnson

I did not vote for Brexit

I did vote for Yes in 2014 for Scotland (although I am undecided how I may vote in any future choice)

I did vote to scrap FPTP
So as befits a Scot

I am a loser

I have "sucked up" all my losses
But
I want Boris Johnson and his party to succeed in their manifesto

I want Brexit to succeed

Within the manifesto's and campaigns they promised much

And I want them to simply deliver that
I disagree with the how, what and why

But that is a by the way

I want any political party in government to succeed
Because I live in this country

And the objectives that are pursued and how they are pursued are something that affect my life, my family's life and that of my community.
I want things to be better

I want to level up

I want to ramp up

I want to build back better
But I will always ask what & whom are we leveling up from, ramping up from or building back better from?

As if you do not know where you are coming from how can you understand where and how you are going?

More from ScottishPanda

[thread] on the utter state of this


So really simple questions

And there are so so many

Why are concerns over race, gender and sexuality put into air quotes e.g. "fashionable"?

Is "fashionable" meant as a derogatory?

Who are you selling this shite to when you write it this way?

When did the government become "too focused" on race, gender and sexuality issues?

Define "too focused" ?

Will now "pivot" - what you mean from today 17th December 2020?

Why could you not focus on "poverty and levelling up" at the same time as equality issues since some of these issues go hand in in hand after all?

Who and what are you "levelling up" from?
Why there was even talk of starving the Irish

But that's ok

Priti only meant it unintentionally

And she was frustrated when she said it

So that's


It's not like the UK talked of invading Spain or Calais

Or was busy trying to incite Irexit, Itexit or the AfD or so other discord in the EU

After all that 50 pence piece

Talks of friendship

So surely we were good friends?

Those liars who had nothing

And knew they had nothing

Well they passed their withdrawal agreement

Knowing they never had any intention of honouring


Oh yes and a reminder

How many Tory MPs are unashamed they passed legislation without forming an opinion on it
[thread]

Let's unpack this


"Since Brussels is convinced"

I like that

Personalise it to Brussels

Not 27 EU nations, our friends, neighbours

"convinced that leaving is an unprecedented act of self-harm"

it has been an act of self-harm

see the damage so far

see why no deal has to be sold as an Australia style deal

see why it has to be hidden within the "massive success" of covid

"it could be proved right"

See UK government forecasts

Not a single one positive

See Liz Truss - unable to explain how any trade deal will make us better off

But not to worry we will "mightily prosper"

"I don't see why they want to crib and confine the UK"

The UK is asking for a deal

The EU will offer one

If the UK doesn't like it well perhaps you should have thought of that before selling simplist fantasy bullshit to lie to voters

More from Culture

One of the authors of the Policy Exchange report on academic free speech thinks it is "ridiculous" to expect him to accurately portray an incident at Cardiff University in his study, both in the reporting and in a question put to a student sample.


Here is the incident Kaufmann incorporated into his study, as told by a Cardiff professor who was there. As you can see, the incident involved the university intervening to *uphold* free speech principles:


Here is the first mention of the Greer at Cardiff incident in Kaufmann's report. It refers to the "concrete case" of the "no-platforming of Germaine Greer". Any reasonable reader would assume that refers to an incident of no-platforming instead of its opposite.


Here is the next mention of Greer in the report. The text asks whether the University "should have overruled protestors" and "stepped in...and guaranteed Greer the right to speak". Again the strong implication is that this did not happen and Greer was "no platformed".


The authors could easily have added a footnote at this point explaining what actually happened in Cardiff. They did not.

You May Also Like