E-mail address to contact Admin direct is admin@religionethics followed by .co.uk.
Just curious - anyone voting Tory?
it's actually still amazing to me how much distilled idiocy there is in all the Tory quotes here.
No more honest under Sunak than they were under Johnson.
Simon Jenkins in the Guardian suggests (I think - his words weren't altogether clear) that if, after Thursday, a number of smaller parties could summon up between them more MPs than the Tories,, they could form a coalition official opposition.
She's only just found out? Did she think she'd joined the Green Party?https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/02/second-reform-candidate-quits-over-racism-and-misogyny
David appears to have been a replacement for a previous Reform UK candidate in the West Ham and Beckton constituency. Until earlier this year, Peter Monks had been the candidate before his name disappeared from the party’s website.
I wasn't suggesting that it be used as a campaign slogan, and I agree about the Brexit mistake, but it kind of makes my point. It's not rational to vote against your own interests because you feel insulted. Brexit was against the status quo but it was always clear that it would only make things worse for most people.You're also right about immigration not being planned for, but it's all too easy for those in power to cover up their own planing failures by simply blaming immigration itself. Actually, it's worse than that, they are trying to blame the relatively small number of asylum seekers - the "small boats". The small boats could be stopped immediately by simply providing a safe and legal way for people in France (and preferably more widely) to apply for asylum in the UK. The planning for the relatively small numbers (compared to legal immigration) should be relatively straightforward, given that most successful applicants will work and contribute to the economy.Collectively, the electorate do behave stupidly, but it's not all about individuals being stupid (although about half of them are below average intelligence) it's partly ignorance, lots of people don't follow politics much at all and only end up with a few sound bites that have filtered through.I think it was Robert A. Heinlein who said, "There are perhaps 5% of the population that simply can't think. There are another 5% who can, and do. The remaining 90% can think, but don't." I think this is doubly true of engagement with political issues so as to make an informed choice.Nasty Nigel doesn't have any worked out policies, just some vacuous slogans. He says "zero net migration" but there's no clue how he'd actual achieve that. And yet large numbers of people are turning to Reform UK because of the slogans alone.There are also the normal cognitive biases that you have to work hard to avoid. A comforting lie can easily appeal more than the hard truth. And since Trump in the US and Johnson here, some politicians seem to think that utterly brazen, barefaced lies are now acceptable. They can easily stick in some people's minds if it's something they find plausible, aligns with what they already think, and they don't pay enough attention to fact-check.
Do you have a special mirror that you look at when you leave the house or just use the one in the hall, to look at yourself while you nod and say 'Clever me'?
Have you got a point to make?
That saying people are stupid because they disagree with you,
He didn't say people are stupid, he said that collectively the electorate behaves stupidly and he gave reasons as to why they do so, none of which were "all the individuals are stupid".We all behave stupidly from time to time for various reasons, not necessarily related to our innate intellectual abilities. Furthermore, even had The Stranger said "people are stupid because they disagree with me" (which he didn't), you don't have to sink to the same level.
He's said thar people who voted for Brexit are stupid,
and that's pretty much based on him just thinking he's right.
It's the same problem with people dismissing those voting for Trump as stupid. Things are more complex than that. I agree we are all stupid at times. That just backs up my point that dismissing 50% of the population as stupid because they voted for something you disagree with seems incredibly narcissistic to me.
No he didn't. He said the UK electorate was stupid enough to vote for Brexit. He then went on to clarify that collectives can make bad decisions even when the individuals in them are not necessarily stupid, listing some reasons as to why that may happen.Not really. I'd say that, objectively, Brexit was a stupid decision. Even some of the people who voted for it now think it was a bit stupid.I would agree with that but Stranger didn't say that (except for the claim that 50% of people are more stupid than average, which is definitionally true if the average used is the median).
That saying people are stupid because they disagree with you, which is all Stranger has repeated, is narcissistic.
If the polls are to be believed, the electorate appears to be about to do something I agree with (as the least bad option in the circumstances). My points still stand.
Your points still seem to me that you are enormously self regarding, and that it must be quite dangerous in terms of whether you pull a muscle patting yourself on the back so frequently.
I put forward my arguments, and you've ignored them in favour of cheap ad homs, and rather ironic ones too, considering how you post here sometimes.Whatever, if calling me names makes you happy, you're welcome. Glad to be of service.....¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Carol Vorderperson on how to get rid of the Tories fir a generation.https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/03/tactical-voting-tories-voters
