Ladies and gentlemen. If you were looking for a way to fight back

[Sir C]

against the tide of Marxist, politically correct nonsense which threatens to overwhelm us, I urge you to take this opportunity to denote a few pounds per month to support our very last hope, dear Dr. Peterson.

https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson

[Peter]

against the tide of Marxist, politically correct nonsense which threatens to overwhelm us, I urge you to take this opportunity to denote a few pounds per month to support our very last hope, dear Dr. Peterson.

https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson

Did Marx spend a great deal of time on non-gender specific pronouns?

I mean, I have read most of it and dont recall much mention of these issues.

[Sir C]

Did Marx spend a great deal of time on non-gender specific pronouns?

I mean, I have read most of it and dont recall much mention of these issues.

The truly amazing thing about leftists is the absolute brass neck with which you will happily sit and defend genocide.

wd p.

[Burney]

against the tide of Marxist, politically correct nonsense which threatens to overwhelm us, I urge you to take this opportunity to denote a few pounds per month to support our very last hope, dear Dr. Peterson.

https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson

They're losing this one and they're starting to get quite cross about it. People are starting to say things like 'Yeah, but you're not a woman, are you? Not really?' and it's driving them (even more) mental.

[Burney]

Did Marx spend a great deal of time on non-gender specific pronouns?

I mean, I have read most of it and dont recall much mention of these issues.

It's absolutely part of the same thing, p. When the left lost the political battle in the late 70s/early 80s, it turned its attention to the cultural sphere, where it has absolutely triumphed.

[Sir C]

They're losing this one and they're starting to get quite cross about it. People are starting to say things like 'Yeah, but you're not a woman, are you? Not really?' and it's driving them (even more) mental.

Oh yes, but Dr P isn't going to stop when he's finished with the transers, Dr P's going to give it to all the leftists, b. :cloud9:

I'd like to go to university and study whatever it is he teaches. I like his voice.

[Peter]

It's absolutely part of the same thing, p. When the left lost the political battle in the late 70s/early 80s, it turned its attention to the cultural sphere, where it has absolutely triumphed.

Its really not part of the same thing though is it, at all? Seems a bit unfair to blame it all on Marx.

[Burney]

Its really not part of the same thing though is it, at all? Seems a bit unfair to blame it all on Marx.

Oh, I'm not saying old Karl believed in trannies, loved minorities or believed in safe spaces - absolutely not.

However, his latter-day adherents have certainly transferred the well-established socialist techniques of controlling speech, thought and action to achieve political and social control to the cultural and academic spheres.

[Peter]

Oh, I'm not saying old Karl believed in trannies, loved minorities or believed in safe spaces - absolutely not.

However, his latter-day adherents have certainly transferred the well-established socialist techniques of controlling speech, thought and action to achieve political and social control to the cultural and academic spheres.

I think MArx was more concerned with who controls the means of production, distribution and exchange than speed, thought and banditry in its many forms.

I had to listen to some **** here going on and on about how coverage of the two world wars never mentions gay soldiers. He was hugely offended when I pointed out that it didnt mention straight ones either, or indeed anything regarding sexual orientation.

When I said I found it offensive that coverage of the Battle of Trafalgar never took account of those in the ranks with learning difficulties I thought he was going to punch me.

[TheCurly]

against the tide of Marxist, politically correct nonsense which threatens to overwhelm us, I urge you to take this opportunity to denote a few pounds per month to support our very last hope, dear Dr. Peterson.

https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson

I see the Frenchies are trying to make wolf-whistling illegal.How else is one suppose to grab the attention of a hot chick.World gone mad I tells you.

[Burney]

I think MArx was more concerned with who controls the means of production, distribution and exchange than speed, thought and banditry in its many forms.

I had to listen to some **** here going on and on about how coverage of the two world wars never mentions gay soldiers. He was hugely offended when I pointed out that it didnt mention straight ones either, or indeed anything regarding sexual orientation.

When I said I found it offensive that coverage of the Battle of Trafalgar never took account of those in the ranks with learning difficulties I thought he was going to punch me.

They still seem to be upset that the film Dunkirk hardly showed any non-white people and simply aren't accepting the 'But that was the historical reality' thing as an excuse.

[Peter]

I see the Frenchies are trying to make wolf-whistling illegal.How else is one suppose to grab the attention of a hot chick.World gone mad I tells you.

Well you are not allowed to grab them now, so that is out. Whistling is out.

Are they actually expecting us to talk to them??? I put up with many things but I am NOT going to have a conversation with a bloody woman. I draw the line at that.

[Sir C]

They still seem to be upset that the film Dunkirk hardly showed any non-white people and simply aren't accepting the 'But that was the historical reality' thing as an excuse.

That Howards End programme is rather good, despite it being Forster... but I am confused that about 50% of the population of Edwardian London was black :shrug:

[Peter]

They still seem to be upset that the film Dunkirk hardly showed any non-white people and simply aren't accepting the 'But that was the historical reality' thing as an excuse.

My nephew was covering Trafalgar at school a few years ago. He learned a lot about conditions on Nelson's ships, about rations, and the role of women in the navy.

THe only bits they left out was a)who won the battle and b) what the battle was about and who it was with.

[Sir C]

My nephew was covering Trafalgar at school a few years ago. He learned a lot about conditions on Nelson's ships, about rations, and the role of women in the navy.

THe only bits they left out was a)who won the battle and b) what the battle was about and who it was with.

It was some years ago that a teacher wrote a ltter to The Times reporting taking her junior school class to central London for a day trip. In Trafalgar Square she asked is anyone knew Nelson's other name and was barraged with cries of, 'Mandela'. :hehe:

[Ash]

I think MArx was more concerned with who controls the means of production, distribution and exchange than speed, thought and banditry in its many forms.


Of course he was.

What rightists are calling 'Cultural Marxism' has got completely fùck-all to do with Marxism. From now on I will be calling it Fake Leftism, as it is turning leftism on its head.

Marxism analyses social relations in terms of class, and concludes that there is a tiny ruling class who control practically all the money and power for their own ends, and then there is everyone else, who really shouldn't be putting up with this arrangement.

The ruling class therefore has to split up everyone else into sub-classes and competing groups to keep everyone squabbling amongst themselves. Hence identity politics (the Fake Left) is just the ticket, as it pitches women v men, black vs white, muslim v christian, transers v filthy normies and so on, and stops us recognising our true class interests (ruling class v the rest).

[Peter]

Of course he was.

What rightists are calling 'Cultural Marxism' has got completely fùck-all to do with Marxism. From now on I will be calling it Fake Leftism, as it is turning leftism on its head.

Marxism analyses social relations in terms of class, and concludes that there is a tiny ruling class who control practically all the money and power for their own ends, and then there is everyone else, who really shouldn't be putting up with this arrangement.

The ruling class therefore has to split up everyone else into sub-classes and competing groups to keep everyone squabbling amongst themselves. Hence identity politics (the Fake Left) is just the ticket, as it pitches women v men, black vs white, muslim v christian, transers v filthy normies and so on, and stops us recognising our true class interests (ruling class v the rest).

Right, but in his day there was a tiny ruling clas that hoarded all the wealth whereas these days...... oh, ****! :)

[Sir C]

Of course he was.

What rightists are calling 'Cultural Marxism' has got completely fùck-all to do with Marxism. From now on I will be calling it Fake Leftism, as it is turning leftism on its head.

Marxism analyses social relations in terms of class, and concludes that there is a tiny ruling class who control practically all the money and power for their own ends, and then there is everyone else, who really shouldn't be putting up with this arrangement.

The ruling class therefore has to split up everyone else into sub-classes and competing groups to keep everyone squabbling amongst themselves. Hence identity politics (the Fake Left) is just the ticket, as it pitches women v men, black vs white, muslim v christian, transers v filthy normies and so on, and stops us recognising our true class interests (ruling class v the rest).

Dr Jordan Peterson says that identity politics is just the post-modern reiteration of Marxism, a.

Now I have no idea what any of that means, but Dr Jordan Peterson knows this shít and he's a professor and everything, so I m afraid you are wrong in this instance.

[Ash]

Of course he was.

What rightists are calling 'Cultural Marxism' has got completely fùck-all to do with Marxism. From now on I will be calling it Fake Leftism, as it is turning leftism on its head.

Marxism analyses social relations in terms of class, and concludes that there is a tiny ruling class who control practically all the money and power for their own ends, and then there is everyone else, who really shouldn't be putting up with this arrangement.

The ruling class therefore has to split up everyone else into sub-classes and competing groups to keep everyone squabbling amongst themselves. Hence identity politics (the Fake Left) is just the ticket, as it pitches women v men, black vs white, muslim v christian, transers v filthy normies and so on, and stops us recognising our true class interests (ruling class v the rest).

and that's before I start on how the Fake Left whores itself in the interests of globalism, corporate capitalism and unelected elites...

[Burney]

Of course he was.

What rightists are calling 'Cultural Marxism' has got completely fùck-all to do with Marxism. From now on I will be calling it Fake Leftism, as it is turning leftism on its head.

Marxism analyses social relations in terms of class, and concludes that there is a tiny ruling class who control practically all the money and power for their own ends, and then there is everyone else, who really shouldn't be putting up with this arrangement.

The ruling class therefore has to split up everyone else into sub-classes and competing groups to keep everyone squabbling amongst themselves. Hence identity politics (the Fake Left) is just the ticket, as it pitches women v men, black vs white, muslim v christian, transers v filthy normies and so on, and stops us recognising our true class interests (ruling class v the rest).

The 'ruling class' (whatever the fück that means these days) didn't do the splitting up, a. Human nature did that and the left have spent the last 40 years reinforcing and formalising those differences through identity politics.

[Burney]

Dr Jordan Peterson says that identity politics is just the post-modern reiteration of Marxism, a.

Now I have no idea what any of that means, but Dr Jordan Peterson knows this shít and he's a professor and everything, so I m afraid you are wrong in this instance.

I suspect he means it in the sense that Marxism was about the struggle of the economically downtrodden and dispossessed and cultural Marxism has extrapolated from that to include downtrodden and dispossessed bumders, chicks and darkies. :shrug:

[Burney]

Dr Jordan Peterson says that identity politics is just the post-modern reiteration of Marxism, a.

Now I have no idea what any of that means, but Dr Jordan Peterson knows this shít and he's a professor and everything, so I m afraid you are wrong in this instance.

If he's a professor, why does he call himself Dr?

[Ash]

Dr Jordan Peterson says that identity politics is just the post-modern reiteration of Marxism, a.

Now I have no idea what any of that means, but Dr Jordan Peterson knows this shít and he's a professor and everything, so I m afraid you are wrong in this instance.

Yeah, right. Doctor. You've obviously had a road-to-Damascus conversion to the merits of the academic world, Sir C. :-D

One more time. Loudly.

IDENTITY POLITICS HAS EFF ALL TO DO WITH MARXISM.

And the right is doing itself no favours by refusing to understand class dialectics.

[Sir C]

If he's a professor, why does he call himself Dr?

He's Canadian :shrug:

I don't know if he's a professor, do I? Anyway, why couldn't a professor be a doctor? Professor is a job title, not a rank.

[Ash]

I suspect he means it in the sense that Marxism was about the struggle of the economically downtrodden and dispossessed and cultural Marxism has extrapolated from that to include downtrodden and dispossessed bumders, chicks and darkies. :shrug:

Nope.

That isn't the starting point. The downtroddenness and dispossesedness was just a by-product of the social relations, and not the focus. The failure of the left was to think it was about compassion, rather than building an alternative and better system, however difficult and unrealistic that might have been.

[Sir C]

Yeah, right. Doctor. You've obviously had a road-to-Damascus conversion to the merits of the academic world, Sir C. :-D

One more time. Loudly.

IDENTITY POLITICS HAS EFF ALL TO DO WITH MARXISM.

And the right is doing itself no favours by refusing to understand class dialectics.

There is no such thing as class any more; you're 40 years out of date. We've had a grocer's daugfhter as prime minister and northern factory workers own houses, cars and smartphones.

The Conservative government of 1979 to the mid 1980s liberated us all from the confines of class.

[Burney]

He's Canadian :shrug:

I don't know if he's a professor, do I? Anyway, why couldn't a professor be a doctor? Professor is a job title, not a rank.

Professor means he has a chair. It's a rare professor who only calls himself Doctor.

[Burney]

There is no such thing as class any more; you're 40 years out of date. We've had a grocer's daugfhter as prime minister and northern factory workers own houses, cars and smartphones.

The Conservative government of 1979 to the mid 1980s liberated us all from the confines of class.

:nod: This is why the left had to shift its tactics to the non-political sphere. Mrs T turned socialism into a dirty word and made ideas like class struggle seem woefully old-fashioned. You can't claim to be acting on behalf of a social group who repeatedly express their unwillingness for you to do so democratically, so the left moved onto minorities instead.

[Peter]

Dr Jordan Peterson says that identity politics is just the post-modern reiteration of Marxism, a.

Now I have no idea what any of that means, but Dr Jordan Peterson knows this shít and he's a professor and everything, so I m afraid you are wrong in this instance.

Professor in the USA simply means employed. In the UK it actually means something- it requires a research profile, a series of publications, a demonstrable body of knowledge, insight and expertise.

Every **** with a piece of chalk is a Professor in the US.

In short, that bloke knows **** all. I bet he got sacked from a university for nobbing the undergrads.

[Sir C]

Professor means he has a chair. It's a rare professor who only calls himself Doctor.

Well since you clearly know best, you ought to advise Dr Jordan Peterson that he is doing it wrong EXCEPT HE'S GOT A BRAIN THE SIZE OF A FÚCKING PLANET AND PROBABLY KNOWS MORE ABOUT THE SUBJECT THAN AN IRISH SCRIBBLER FOR FÚCK'S SAKE.

"Jordan Bernt Peterson (born June 12, 1962) is a Canadian clinical psychologist, cultural critic, and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto."

[Peter]

Professor means he has a chair. It's a rare professor who only calls himself Doctor.

Only in the UK. And these days all it really means here is that you dont do any teachings. There is no actual chair.

[Peter]

Well since you clearly know best, you ought to advise Dr Jordan Peterson that he is doing it wrong EXCEPT HE'S GOT A BRAIN THE SIZE OF A FÚCKING PLANET AND PROBABLY KNOWS MORE ABOUT THE SUBJECT THAN AN IRISH SCRIBBLER FOR FÚCK'S SAKE.

"Jordan Bernt Peterson (born June 12, 1962) is a Canadian clinical psychologist, cultural critic, and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto."

Wooaaahh! Hang on. Cultural critic?? His qualifications are as a psychologist ie a ****. Keep the cultural criticism for your amazon reviews you ****.

[Burney]

Professor in the USA simply means employed. In the UK it actually means something- it requires a research profile, a series of publications, a demonstrable body of knowledge, insight and expertise.

Yes. And a chair.

Is it a special chair, do you know? Not like Professor Stephen Hawking's special chair, but all fancy and gold like a throne?

Whenever I hear someone is the holds the Cyril Regis Chair of Chemistry or whatever, I like to imagine a right fancy sort of a chair.

[Ash]

There is no such thing as class any more; you're 40 years out of date. We've had a grocer's daugfhter as prime minister and northern factory workers own houses, cars and smartphones.

The Conservative government of 1979 to the mid 1980s liberated us all from the confines of class.

No, your ideas of class are out of date.

Class isn't about wearing a flat cap, working in a factory and speaking in a regional accent. Class, in pure Marxist terms, is where you stand in relation to the ownership of the means of production, and most people own fùck all of it, and have no power in society. Class isn't out-of-date, but the old stereotyped ideas of what it is are out of date.

If I thought anyone actually READ my posts, rather than triggering off some keyword and then talking about something entirely tangential while ignoring my points, I would elaborate.

Ain't worf it, though. :sulk:

[Sir C]

Professor in the USA simply means employed. In the UK it actually means something- it requires a research profile, a series of publications, a demonstrable body of knowledge, insight and expertise.

Every **** with a piece of chalk is a Professor in the US.

In short, that bloke knows **** all. I bet he got sacked from a university for nobbing the undergrads.

He knows everything, p. He's a genius. You should hear some of the words he uses!

[Peter]

:nod: This is why the left had to shift its tactics to the non-political sphere. Mrs T turned socialism into a dirty word and made ideas like class struggle seem woefully old-fashioned. You can't claim to be acting on behalf of a social group who repeatedly express their unwillingness for you to do so democratically, so the left moved onto minorities instead.

Apart from the fact that were hardly any northern factory workers left by the time she had finished, she did not destroy class, merely the mechanism through which it expressed itself ie the unions.

She destroyed a centrist consensus and thus unleashed socialism onto british politics.

[Viva Prat Vegas]

"You should hear some of the words he uses!"

Long ones are they ?
Multiple syllables ?

[Pat Vegas]

Did Marx spend a great deal of time on non-gender specific pronouns?

I mean, I have read most of it and dont recall much mention of these issues.

I had a look at the big book in my house but none of it made a lot of sense.

Mainly as the Italian version.

[Sir C]

No, your ideas of class are out of date.

Class isn't about wearing a flat cap, working in a factory and speaking in a regional accent. Class, in pure Marxist terms, is where you stand in relation to the ownership of the means of production, and most people own fùck all of it, and have no power in society. Class isn't out-of-date, but the old stereotyped ideas of what it is are out of date.

If I thought anyone actually READ my posts, rather than triggering off some keyword and then talking about something entirely tangential while ignoring my points, I would elaborate.

Ain't worf it, though. :sulk:

Anyone working for someone else who is frstrated that they don't own these 'means of production' is at liberty to go and work for themselves, aren't they? A self-employed window cleaner owns his means of production, doesn't he?

[Burney]

No, your ideas of class are out of date.

Class isn't about wearing a flat cap, working in a factory and speaking in a regional accent. Class, in pure Marxist terms, is where you stand in relation to the ownership of the means of production, and most people own fùck all of it, and have no power in society. Class isn't out-of-date, but the old stereotyped ideas of what it is are out of date.

If I thought anyone actually READ my posts, rather than triggering off some keyword and then talking about something entirely tangential while ignoring my points, I would elaborate.

Ain't worf it, though. :sulk:

The concept of class is only meaningful if people feel its gradations applies to them, though. People don't feel like that anymore. Tell a family with a four-bedroom house, two new cars, foreign holidays and nice, white-collar jobs which provide a comfortable standard of living that they are in fact the new proletariat because they don't own the means of production and they will - not unreasonably - tell you to fück off.

In short, the concept of 'class' as understood by Marx is hopelessly out of date.

[Burney]

Only in the UK. And these days all it really means here is that you dont do any teachings. There is no actual chair.

No chair? :-(

[Peter]

Yes. And a chair.

Is it a special chair, do you know? Not like Professor Stephen Hawking's special chair, but all fancy and gold like a throne?

Whenever I hear someone is the holds the Cyril Regis Chair of Chemistry or whatever, I like to imagine a right fancy sort of a chair.

The term 'chair' traditionally relates to an old endowment. It is rarely used these days and there is certainly no actual chair.

They dont need a chair as they hardly ever set foot on campus.

[Viva Prat Vegas]

Did you know you can buy face-sitting chairs ?
True dat

[Sir C]

"You should hear some of the words he uses!"

Long ones are they ?
Multiple syllables ?

Yep. Words you've never heard of, s!

[Peter]

No chair? :-(

I'm afraid not :(

[Burney]

The term 'chair' traditionally relates to an old endowment. It is rarely used these days and there is certainly no actual chair.

They dont need a chair as they hardly ever set foot on campus.

Well this is very disappointing, I must say. Were there ever actual chairs?

What about Professors of Music? Do they have Musical Chairs?

[Burney]

Did you know you can buy face-sitting chairs ?
True dat

What? Why do you need a chair to sit on someone's face?

[SWv2]

No chair? :-(

My brother was a professor, can't recall any special chair that only he was allowed to sit in.

[TheCurly]

My brother was a professor, can't recall any special chair that only he was allowed to sit in.

My auld da had one of those :-(

[Sir C]

My brother was a professor, can't recall any special chair that only he was allowed to sit in.

:hehe: :hehe: :clap:

A professor is someone who teaches at a 'university', sw. This is a place where people on England who can read and write go to, look, just forget it ok?

[Viva Prat Vegas]

"What? Why do you need a chair to sit on someone's face?"

To provide overall comfort for the woman before she receives specific close quarters comfort

[Burney]

My brother was a professor, can't recall any special chair that only he was allowed to sit in.

My uncle (God rest his soul) had a chair also. At UCD. He took it off of an Englishman they were going to give it to. There was all manner of skullduggery, apparently.

[Burney]

"What? Why do you need a chair to sit on someone's face?"

To provide overall comfort for the woman before she receives specific close quarters comfort

It doesn't sound vert comfortable for the chap. Is he lying down or just having to crane his neck?

All in all, I think that the point at which you need to bring a special chair in for sexy time is the point at which you knock it on the head.

[SWv2]

:hehe: :hehe: :clap:

A professor is someone who teaches at a 'university', sw. This is a place where people on England who can read and write go to, look, just forget it ok?

He was a professor at universities in Ireland, Argentina and somewhere in Scandinavia (Norway perhaps). Something related to some college in the States also, Houston I believe.

:shrug:

[Viva Prat Vegas]

These Professor chairs are the Chesterfield type no ?
Mastermind ?

[Sir C]

He was a professor at universities in Ireland, Argentina and somewhere in Scandinavia (Norway perhaps). Something related to some college in the States also, Houston I believe.

:shrug:

Ah, that explains it. Foreign 'universities'. Carry on.

[Burney]

These Professor chairs are the Chesterfield type no ?
Mastermind ?

I think there's a business opportunity selling bespoke chairs to Professors. Ones with built-in remote controls and fridges in the handles where they can keep their beer. Classy, like.

[Viva Prat Vegas]

"It doesn't sound vert comfortable for the chap. Is he lying down or just having to crane his neck? All in all, I think that the point at which you need to bring a special chair in for sexy time is the point at which you knock it on the head. "

The poor giver has to lie flat but crane his neck upwards so not only are his tongue and nose assaulted , his (or her) neck and shoulder muscles suffer too
All in the name of giving

[Burney]

He was a professor at universities in Ireland, Argentina and somewhere in Scandinavia (Norway perhaps). Something related to some college in the States also, Houston I believe.

:shrug:

Be honest, sw: when he was 'teaching in Argentina', etc, was this just a cover story your family told because he was in prison?

[Burney]

"It doesn't sound vert comfortable for the chap. Is he lying down or just having to crane his neck? All in all, I think that the point at which you need to bring a special chair in for sexy time is the point at which you knock it on the head. "

The poor giver has to lie flat but crane his neck upwards so not only are his tongue and nose assaulted , his (or her) neck and shoulder muscles suffer too
All in the name of giving

Fück that shït, s.

[Viva Prat Vegas]

"I think there's a business opportunity selling bespoke chairs to Professors. Ones with built-in remote controls and fridges in the handles where they can keep their beer. Classy, like."

Sounds inspired by that magic chair Jimmy Savile occupied when fixing things
Ash tray dispenser if you press one button
If you press another , his cigar pops out

[Burney]

Sounds inspired by that magic chair Jimmy Savile occupied when fixing things
Ash tray dispenser if you press one button
If you press another , his cigar pops out

This one? Interestingly, it was velour. Given his proclivities, I'd have thought he'd have wanted something a bit more wipe-clean.

801

[Ash]

Anyone working for someone else who is frstrated that they don't own these 'means of production' is at liberty to go and work for themselves, aren't they? A self-employed window cleaner owns his means of production, doesn't he?

Petit-bourgs innit. Seperate class. And of course the Amazon worker is free to go and set up his own global distribution company, buy the Washington Post and take a $600m contract with the CIA, but MoP is a possible distraction. Class lines do exist, but not how we used to see them. I will expand on this.

[SWv2]

I think there's a business opportunity selling bespoke chairs to Professors. Ones with built-in remote controls and fridges in the handles where they can keep their beer. Classy, like.

Prof'll Fix It.

[Viva Prat Vegas]

That's the one Yes
Looking at the base it looks as if it can rotate fully
I think Jim'll did use protective sheets to cover the bedroom furniture and clothing belonging to his late Mother which in a diversion from the narrative he kept untouched after she passed

[Burney]

That's the one Yes
Looking at the base it looks as if it can rotate fully
I think Jim'll did use protective sheets to cover the bedroom furniture and clothing belonging to his late Mother which in a diversion from the narrative he kept untouched after she passed

It was up for auction. I've no idea who would want to buy such a thing.

[Ash]

The concept of class is only meaningful if people feel its gradations applies to them, though. People don't feel like that anymore. Tell a family with a four-bedroom house, two new cars, foreign holidays and nice, white-collar jobs which provide a comfortable standard of living that they are in fact the new proletariat because they don't own the means of production and they will - not unreasonably - tell you to fück off.

In short, the concept of 'class' as understood by Marx is hopelessly out of date.

But tell them that their vote in the referendum needs to be over-ruled because the experts say so, and the new class divisions become clearer. Tell them that they are lesser humans because they are not an approved minority and they may become politicised. The ruling class, with its various components in finance, politics, media, capital, entertainment, academia stands for itself, and uses its power to increase its influence and consolidate that power. The ordinary people as a whole with little money or power, even if they have a new car that they are snared in debt to own, (and call them what class you will) have a vote, and they have numbers. There is a contemporary class struggle right there.

[Burney]

But tell them that their vote in the referendum needs to be over-ruled because the experts say so, and the new class divisions become clearer. Tell them that they are lesser humans because they are not an approved minority and they may become politicised. The ruling class, with its various components in finance, politics, media, capital, entertainment, academia stands for itself, and uses its power to increase its influence and consolidate that power. The ordinary people as a whole with little money or power, even if they have a new car that they are snared in debt to own, (and call them what class you will) have a vote, and they have numbers. There is a contemporary class struggle right there.

Yes, but again you need to define your terms. Much of what you call 'the ruling class' these days is - to my mind and many others - very much of the left and in some instances explicitly left-wing. People no longer feel oppressed by aristos and industrialists, they feel oppressed by a media/academic/entertainment/civil service and political class most of whom would probably identify as left-wing.

This is the thing: the left is the new ruling class, which renders Marxist notions of its overthrow outdated.

[Ash]

Yes, but again you need to define your terms. Much of what you call 'the ruling class' these days is - to my mind and many others - very much of the left and in some instances explicitly left-wing. People no longer feel oppressed by aristos and industrialists, they feel oppressed by a media/academic/entertainment/civil service and political class most of whom would probably identify as left-wing.

This is the thing: the left is the new ruling class, which renders Marxist notions of its overthrow outdated.

I agree, the Fake Left is now the ruling class. Historical Materialism is the understanding that at any point in history there will be a struggle between classes. Not that class struggle was always going to be the traditional Labour v Capital. The current class struggle is national sovereignty v globalism. Though it is mainly the 'deplorable' forces of labour who favour the former, and the owners of capital (and I don't mean a fùcking ladder and a piece of cloth) who are for the latter.

I was reading the other day (can't remember where) that Blair's real reason for racking up immigration was not to "rub the right's nose in diversity" but to push down labour costs.

[Burney]

I agree, the Fake Left is now the ruling class. Historical Materialism is the understanding that at any point in history there will be a struggle between classes. Not that class struggle was always going to be the traditional Labour v Capital. The current class struggle is national sovereignty v globalism. Though it is mainly the 'deplorable' forces of labour who favour the former, and the owners of capital (and I don't mean a fùcking ladder and a piece of cloth) who are for the latter.

I was reading the other day (can't remember where) that Blair's real reason for racking up immigration was not to "rub the right's nose in diversity" but to push down labour costs.

I agree with all your points about the battle lines, but think the attempt to frame them within the context of Marxism isn't a good fit. For instance, nationalism was always anathema to the classical Marxist because it worked directly in opposition to the idea of internationalism. However, it is now a flag around which the culturally and socially diverse strands who oppose a globalist vision can rally. To frame that as a purely class issue is rather simplistic.

All in all, I think it's now simply too fragmented and diverse a social and political picture to apply any monolithic political framework to it.

[Peter]

I agree, the Fake Left is now the ruling class. Historical Materialism is the understanding that at any point in history there will be a struggle between classes. Not that class struggle was always going to be the traditional Labour v Capital. The current class struggle is national sovereignty v globalism. Though it is mainly the 'deplorable' forces of labour who favour the former, and the owners of capital (and I don't mean a fùcking ladder and a piece of cloth) who are for the latter.

I was reading the other day (can't remember where) that Blair's real reason for racking up immigration was not to "rub the right's nose in diversity" but to push down labour costs.

It really, honestly was a miscalculation more than anything else. They genuinely thought the eastern european migration would be far smaller and more gradual. The motivation was a gradual change in the demographic to expand the workforce over the next two decades and look after the millions of old *******s we are stuck with.

That and to push labour costs down in certain sectors. :)

[Burney]

It really, honestly was a miscalculation more than anything else. They genuinely thought the eastern european migration would be far smaller and more gradual. The motivation was a gradual change in the demographic to expand the workforce over the next two decades and look after the millions of old *******s we are stuck with.

That and to push labour costs down in certain sectors. :)

A miscalculation? :hehe:

A miscalculation is when a barmaid gets someone's change wrong, not when a Prime Minister lets millions of migrants in, thus fundamentally altering a society's demographics in the space of a decade.

[redgunamo]

It really, honestly was a miscalculation more than anything else. They genuinely thought the eastern european migration would be far smaller and more gradual. The motivation was a gradual change in the demographic to expand the workforce over the next two decades and look after the millions of old *******s we are stuck with.

That and to push labour costs down in certain sectors. :)

:nod: And to make up for the fact that you's lot are all impotent crybaby homos and snowflakes. Far more politically expedient to import redgunamos and various other foreign undesirables than call you out on it.

Essentially what you've done is make a cash settlement on your future, rather than actually take care of it yourselves. glwtpimo.

[redgunamo]

A miscalculation? :hehe:

A miscalculation is when a barmaid gets someone's change wrong, not when a Prime Minister lets millions of migrants in, thus fundamentally altering a society's demographics in the space of a decade.

Right. I'm not sure what the alternative could've been. Apart from the obvious, obviously.

[Burney]

Right. I'm not sure what the alternative could've been. Apart from the obvious, obviously.

I'm struggling to work out what the story is here, though? Was it a miscalculation (i.e. incompetence) or was it a deliberate decision taken with long-term aims in mind?

[Sir C]

:nod: And to make up for the fact that you's lot are all impotent crybaby homos and snowflakes. Far more politically expedient to import redgunamos and various other foreign undesirables than call you out on it.

Essentially what you've done is make a cash settlement on your future, rather than actually take care of it yourselves. glwtpimo.

You're not foreign, you're from Henley ffs!

[redgunamo]

I'm struggling to work out what the story is here, though? Was it a miscalculation (i.e. incompetence) or was it a deliberate decision taken with long-term aims in mind?

The latter, I think. At least in Germany, from whence most of my facts about the business come from.

The numbers may be a little frightening, but there's always plenty of wastage where livestock is concerned; most won't actually settle and will simply drift off into elsewhere or back home, rather than stay and be a long-term burden on the national purse.

Anyway, as I said, cash isn't really a problem, kids is.

[Peter]

I'm struggling to work out what the story is here, though? Was it a miscalculation (i.e. incompetence) or was it a deliberate decision taken with long-term aims in mind?

THe decision is to welcome the immigration. THe miscalculation was the scale. In the numbers they envisaged, the benefits were obvious.

I mean, lets not think for a moment that Brexit is going to put an end to EU migration to Britain. You dont honestly think that do you????

The idea is to control who comes in by taking back our borders. In other words, government responding to the lobbying and 'influence' of certain industries to allow ****loads of poles in at certain times.

We still need a migrant workforce and we are still going to have one. Anyone who thought they were voting to end immigration is going to be pretty ****ing furious in 5-10 years time.

[redgunamo]

You're not foreign, you're from Henley ffs!

Interesting thing; I was back there again recently and we got to musing that fifty-odd years ago, when I was a nipper, there was a grand total of seven redgunamos "fundamentally altering a society's demographics".

Nowadays, while there are dozens more of us going about around the globe, there's still only seven of us in Henley.

[redgunamo]

THe decision is to welcome the immigration. THe miscalculation was the scale. In the numbers they envisaged, the benefits were obvious.

I mean, lets not think for a moment that Brexit is going to put an end to EU migration to Britain. You dont honestly think that do you????

The idea is to control who comes in by taking back our borders. In other words, government responding to the lobbying and 'influence' of certain industries to allow ****loads of poles in at certain times.

We still need a migrant workforce and we are still going to have one. Anyone who thought they were voting to end immigration is going to be pretty ****ing furious in 5-10 years time.

Brexit was merely an opportunity for people to show what they believe in; nothing to do with specifics and stats and whatnot.

In other words, it's the culture, stupid :-)

[Ash]

I agree with all your points about the battle lines, but think the attempt to frame them within the context of Marxism isn't a good fit. For instance, nationalism was always anathema to the classical Marxist because it worked directly in opposition to the idea of internationalism. However, it is now a flag around which the culturally and socially diverse strands who oppose a globalist vision can rally. To frame that as a purely class issue is rather simplistic.

All in all, I think it's now simply too fragmented and diverse a social and political picture to apply any monolithic political framework to it.

Marx's internationalism was based on a solidarity among workers, not a solidarity among owners of big capital, as per globalism. Nationalism doesn't have to be ugly, chauvinist and violent, but in the hands of the right it has sometimes shown an unfortunate tendency to take on these characteristics.

A healthy nationalism to oppose globalism should be based no the understanding that the nation state is currently the best unit of democratic self-determination available, while peacefully respecting other nations, not that ones own country is superior to the rest.

[redgunamo]

Marx's internationalism was based on a solidarity among workers, not a solidarity among owners of big capital, as per globalism. Nationalism doesn't have to be ugly, chauvinist and violent, but in the hands of the right it has sometimes shown an unfortunate tendency to take on these characteristics.

A healthy nationalism to oppose globalism should be based no the understanding that the nation state is currently the best unit of democratic self-determination available, while peacefully respecting other nations, not that ones own country is superior to the rest.

Isn't your second paragraph there a mass of contradictions?

And anyway, Marx was a German; his innate idea was always based on the principle that the "German Way" would obviously always be predominant.

[Ash]

Isn't your second paragraph there a mass of contradictions?


Nope. Not to me. What is best for us is best for us. We don't have to impose it on everyone else.

[redgunamo]

Nope. Not to me. What is best for us is best for us. We don't have to impose it on everyone else.

Surely that's inherent in the statement though? Not so much imposing it on everyone else as offering it to them. After all, why should anybody be forced to accept less than the best; asylum seekers, migrants and what-have-you. And when you want to exclude them, then where's the solidarity bit? If we say "Britain is best" then surely we have to put our money where our mouth is?

[Peter]

Surely that's inherent in the statement though? Not so much imposing it on everyone else as offering it to them. After all, why should anybody be forced to accept less than the best; asylum seekers, migrants and what-have-you. And when you want to exclude them, then where's the solidarity bit? If we say "Britain is best" then surely we have to put our money where our mouth is?

I think, on balance, you would probably find that there wasn't really much in it either way, if you see what I mean.

[Ash]

We still need a migrant workforce and we are still going to have one. Anyone who thought they were voting to end immigration is going to be pretty ****ing furious in 5-10 years time.

I don't think many people were voting to end immigration, more to optimise it.

[Ash]

Surely that's inherent in the statement though? Not so much imposing it on everyone else as offering it to them. After all, why should anybody be forced to accept less than the best; asylum seekers, migrants and what-have-you. And when you want to exclude them, then where's the solidarity bit? If we say "Britain is best" then surely we have to put our money where our mouth is?

It's not up to us to decide what's best for them. It's up to them. And who is saying that Britain is best? And at what? If one country takes a path that works in some way, others may choose to follow.

It's imperialists, technocrats, jihadis and popes who insist they know what's best for everyone else.

[Peter]

I don't think many people were voting to end immigration, more to optimise it.

I dont think many people are able to distinguish between those two things.