sadoldgit

I still can’t get my head around how poor we were in the second half. No energy. No commitment. No desire to get the second goal. I can live with losing but at least make a fight of it.

I know about their backgrounds and both are highly respected journalists. Your problem is that you are so biased you think everyone else is. Both of them know and understand a lot more about politics than you ever will. You throw around labels but throw your dummy out of the pram when others use labels you don’t like. You support people with questionable values. Own it.

There are plenty of you google are Reform UK a far right party and is Tommy Robinson far right. https://bylinetimes.com/2024/10/07/why-reform-uk-is-far-right/ https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/news/article/british-farright-activist-tommy-robinson-to-stand-in-eu-elections Some examples above.

Get Manning off! 😂

🫣

Without Scienza and Fellows were are very average.

I don’t think that the Regency period Blackadder writing progressed from the Elizabethan era. The WW1 era however had a more depth with the subject matter giving the writers more to get their teeth into. It was ok, but the bar was very high after series 2.

Blackadder is an interesting omission from many lists. The first series, written by Roman Atkinson and Richard Curtis, wasn’t great. Ben Elton and Richard Curtis wrote the Elizabethan themed second series, which was brilliant. They also wrote third series, which was okay, and the fourth series set in WW1, which was again brilliant, especially the last episode which is probably one of the greatest pieces of television ever. For those who hate the BBC, that alone was worth the license fee for a decade. I’m guessing that it is not up there with the greats for many because of the unevenness of the four series?

Donald in trouble with the law again. https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-is-sued-over-white-house-ballroom-construction-3e9098a0?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqfH-gLp0s9XVuG3oloSMWg_KCl5IwFRBRJweTn6I08cR2x6qZ4fk9OXT-Qp7ZY%3D&gaa_ts=693c7f7c&gaa_sig=biQJ5IYCu0n0FdksN2wVpJkwTah6lbJxBxQKxZYAxzW7fuDADCGQg678a5s7cMs0yZ8dvBPDD-gNv12cbsVM6w%3D%3D

I have read countless articles and listened to countless broadcasts where the journalists/reporters have described Reform UK as “far right” and Robinson’s views as being “far right” but if you are desperate for some names here are two recent ones - Jon Sopel and Emily Maitlis.

I didn’t say you were. In fact I said that I didn’t think that you were. The language that I use comes from the people in the media who talk about people with what they call far right opinions. If posters support those people it is not unreasonable to conclude that they sympathise with the views expressed. There is a big difference between Ralph and myself. He defends the views of the kind of people I attack. I am not the only person who thinks that Farage, Robinson etc are scumbags with abhorrent views. Anyone supporting or defending them is no better. If you posted something slagging off Robinson and someone responded by being supportive of him, don’t tell me that you wouldn’t reach the same conclusion that I would. I will say this for both Ralph and nic, neither pretend to be anything other than who they are and are very open about what they believe in.

I don’t know what constitutes a moderate Tory in the 1930’s but there was clearly a big gap between the main Tory Party and people like Mosley and his black shirts. Obviously we didn’t have the immigrant issue in the 30’s to the extent that we do now, although Jewish communities faced discrimination. My point is that the Tory Party became more divided over Brexit with the party generally moving further to the right. You mentioned being a one nation Tory yourself, those moderates vanished after Johnson came to power. There is now an area of politics that is between a moderate Tory and the extreme right (which you could label fascistic). This area covers people with the type of views that have been mentioned about and are labelled now as “far right” and “alt-right.” What you would call “right” the media calls “far right” now to differentiate between moderates and more hardliners. From what you post I don’t think that you could be classed as “far right” so it differentiates between your views and those with harder views. I think we all know what we are talking about, we just use different labels.

Not sure where to start. Most of them to be honest, hence why the AI search refers to the definition of “far right” as it does. As I have said before, I refer to certain people and views as being “far right” because the media do.

Haven’t seen Yellowstone but we enjoyed 1883 and 1923. I’m not going to be very original and say The Sopranos and Games of Thrones. Came late to The Line Of Duty but that is up there. Oh yes, agree with Slow Horses too. Comedy wise it has to be Only Fools and Horses along with Monty Python and Fawlty Towers with a special mention for Michael Palin’s Ripping Yarns. Tomkinson’s Schooldays was particularly brilliant.

Katie Hopkins’ official YouTube channel has had over 160 million views. I wouldn’t call that disappearing from view. She might not be as visible as she was before she was suspended from Twitter/X but her name is still synonymous with far right views.

Sanctions or no sanctions, under International law what the US did = piracy.

If you look at the definition above it says that the definition has changed in recent. The degrees from centre right to extreme right have been redefined to meet today’s ideologies rather than those of the 1930’s.

You want me to give you a list of decent journalists?

Do you think that the KKK are pro Trump/MAGA? If so, would you be “concerned.”

I think you will find that a great many people do, given his background. And yes, I do too. Why? He ticks all the boxes ( read above)

Fine, but then the discussion breaks down because you don’t have the same reference points. When I talk about the mainstream media I am not talking about the front page of the Daily Mail. I am talking about vey well regarded journalists. They aren’t all rubbish.

My point is that I use exactly the same labels that the general media uses for people with certain views and ideologies. If you wish to call those views “right” that is your definition. Others would call those views “far right.” We can spend all day throwing definitions around. It is simpler to talk about people with those views, but then you need to know who those people and what their views are.

If you are going to engage in discussion about the growth of “far right” views in this country you really need to. Otherwise you end up like The Kraken and call people “fuckwits” when they are just using definitions that are widely used in the mainstream media.

Again, using AI which has reviewed 9 different sources, this is how it defines the current use of “far right.” In UK politics, “far right” is a political label used by journalists, academics and campaign groups, not an official category, and it is often contested by those it is applied to. It is generally used for politicians linked to hardline anti‑immigration, nationalist or anti‑Islam positions and to parties described as part of the far‑right spectrum.[bylinetimes +2] How the label is used Commentators tend to apply “far right” when a politician or party is seen as going beyond mainstream conservative positions into ethnic nationalism, cultural supremacism or conspiracy‑style rhetoric about migrants and “elites”. Anti‑fascist and anti‑racist organisations also use the term in reports to describe figures they view as connected to extremist movements or street activism, which then feeds into media language.[wikipedia +2] Reform UK and Nigel Farage Nigel Farage, long associated first with UKIP and then with Reform UK, is now frequently described in European and UK commentary as a leading figure of the “far right” in Britain, especially because of his hardline migration stance and nationalist rhetoric. A major anti‑fascist group has recently described Reform UK under Farage as the biggest far‑right political threat in Britain, illustrating how campaigners place him and parts of his party on the far‑right spectrum, even though he rejects that label himself.[lemonde +2]

Further definitions of what we understand “far right” to mean from other “fuckwits” In the UK, “far right” is a contested political label and is usually applied to certain ideologies, parties, and activists rather than being a neutral description. It combines both specific extremist movements and, more loosely, some hard‑line anti‑immigration or nationalist figures in the public eye.[wikipedia +1] What “far right” usually means In UK public debate, “far right” typically refers to politics that combine ethnic or cultural nationalism, strong anti‑immigration stances, hostility to Islam or multiculturalism, and conspiracy‑style narratives about “elites” or demographic “replacement”. Some parts of this spectrum also include white supremacist, neo‑Nazi or overtly anti‑democratic ideas, which are treated by authorities as extremist or terror‑linked.[institute +2] Prominent parties and movements Commentators and researchers often class groups such as the British National Party (BNP), Britain First, For Britain, Generation Identity England, Patriotic Alternative and related networks as part of the far right in the UK context. Some of these groups have been sanctioned, banned from social‑media platforms or even proscribed under terrorism legislation because of incitement to hatred or support for political violence.[wikipedia +3] Individual activists in the public eye Individual street agitators and organisers associated with anti‑Muslim marches, hard‑line nationalist rallies or violent rhetoric are often labelled “far right” in mainstream coverage. High‑profile examples have included figures connected to groups like the English Defence League or Britain First, as well as organisers and influencers linked to recent anti‑migrant and anti‑Muslim protests.[bbc +2] How media and campaigns use the term Mainstream political leaders, anti‑racist groups and a range of celebrities have recently talked about a “rise of the far right”, often in connection with the growth of parties like Reform UK and street mobilisations led by nationalist agitators. At the same time, some commentators criticise “far right” as being used too loosely in media debate, arguing that it can sometimes blur distinctions between extremist groups and more conventional right‑wing or populist parties.[youtube +2] Public perception and controversy Public perception is shaped by news reporting on hate crimes, riots and extremist plots that trace back to far‑right networks or propaganda. Because “far right” is a political label, people on the receiving end often reject it and describe themselves instead as “patriots”, “anti‑establishment” or defenders of free speech, which keeps the debate about who is “far right” highly contested.[thecritic +2]