FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > The difference between an expat and an immigrant
The difference between an expat and an immigrant
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 | |||
 | |||
| |||
"Always a noodle scratcher. Whenever someone comes to this country they are called an immigrant, but whenever we migrate to another country we are called “expats”, surely we should be called immigrants also. Isn’t it time that british immigrants drop the word expat because it’s clearly a term which tries to hide an inconvenient truth. That we go over to countries and do the same thing that immigrants who come here do. Also I’ve heard stories of expats illegally migrating to other countries to evade convictions. Hypocrisy at its finest, or is there nothing to see here? " So do you think the expat entered the country illegal at the beginning r went through a process menig they had a legitimate right to be there and work there. | |||
"Always a noodle scratcher. Whenever someone comes to this country they are called an immigrant, but whenever we migrate to another country we are called “expats”, surely we should be called immigrants also. Isn’t it time that british immigrants drop the word expat because it’s clearly a term which tries to hide an inconvenient truth. That we go over to countries and do the same thing that immigrants who come here do. Also I’ve heard stories of expats illegally migrating to other countries to evade convictions. Hypocrisy at its finest, or is there nothing to see here? So do you think the expat entered the country illegal at the beginning r went through a process menig they had a legitimate right to be there and work there. " ................................. Perhaps a question for indigenous Australians or Native Americans...or anywhere else in the world colonised by force. | |||
| |||
"'Expats / emigrants' are people from here that have gone over there. 'Immigrants' are people from over there that have come over here. Which label gets applied to you depends on which country you're standing in. You seem to think that 'immigrant is a bad word used to label people we don't like. You're wrong." You’re only speaking for yourself. To some, the word ‘immigrant’ is definitely a bad word. | |||
"Always a noodle scratcher. Whenever someone comes to this country they are called an immigrant, but whenever we migrate to another country we are called “expats”, surely we should be called immigrants also. Isn’t it time that british immigrants drop the word expat because it’s clearly a term which tries to hide an inconvenient truth. That we go over to countries and do the same thing that immigrants who come here do. Also I’ve heard stories of expats illegally migrating to other countries to evade convictions. Hypocrisy at its finest, or is there nothing to see here? " ................................. The other sanitising expression to describe (usually) white immigrants/refugees is emigre. Imagine the small boat refugees being described as such by the Daily Mail. | |||
"Always a noodle scratcher. Whenever someone comes to this country they are called an immigrant, but whenever we migrate to another country we are called “expats”, surely we should be called immigrants also. Isn’t it time that british immigrants drop the word expat because it’s clearly a term which tries to hide an inconvenient truth. That we go over to countries and do the same thing that immigrants who come here do. Also I’ve heard stories of expats illegally migrating to other countries to evade convictions. Hypocrisy at its finest, or is there nothing to see here? ................................. The other sanitising expression to describe (usually) white immigrants/refugees is emigre. Imagine the small boat refugees being described as such by the Daily Mail." Not (usually), Albanians are mostly white. | |||
"'Expats / emigrants' are people from here that have gone over there. 'Immigrants' are people from over there that have come over here. Which label gets applied to you depends on which country you're standing in. You seem to think that 'immigrant is a bad word used to label people we don't like. You're wrong. You’re only speaking for yourself. To some, the word ‘immigrant’ is definitely a bad word. " It's an excellent word to rile up the electorate when something else is going on that the government/press don't want us to think about. Wait no, look at those immigrants over there in that boat. | |||
"Always a noodle scratcher. Whenever someone comes to this country they are called an immigrant, but whenever we migrate to another country we are called “expats”, surely we should be called immigrants also. Isn’t it time that british immigrants drop the word expat because it’s clearly a term which tries to hide an inconvenient truth. That we go over to countries and do the same thing that immigrants who come here do. Also I’ve heard stories of expats illegally migrating to other countries to evade convictions. Hypocrisy at its finest, or is there nothing to see here? ................................. The other sanitising expression to describe (usually) white immigrants/refugees is emigre. Imagine the small boat refugees being described as such by the Daily Mail. Not (usually), Albanians are mostly white. " ................................ My point was the term is rarely, if ever used to describe non-white immigrants. | |||
"'Expats / emigrants' are people from here that have gone over there. 'Immigrants' are people from over there that have come over here. Which label gets applied to you depends on which country you're standing in. You seem to think that 'immigrant is a bad word used to label people we don't like. You're wrong. You’re only speaking for yourself. To some, the word ‘immigrant’ is definitely a bad word. It's an excellent word to rile up the electorate when something else is going on that the government/press don't want us to think about. Wait no, look at those immigrants over there in that boat. " ********************************** "Don't want US (as in I and millions of others) to think about" Speak for yourself, most of us don't need you to speak on our behalf, thank you. Besides, your constant rhetoric is beginning to bore some of us. Change the record....... please?? | |||
| |||
"'Expats / emigrants' are people from here that have gone over there. 'Immigrants' are people from over there that have come over here. Which label gets applied to you depends on which country you're standing in. You seem to think that 'immigrant is a bad word used to label people we don't like. You're wrong. You’re only speaking for yourself. To some, the word ‘immigrant’ is definitely a bad word. It's an excellent word to rile up the electorate when something else is going on that the government/press don't want us to think about. Wait no, look at those immigrants over there in that boat. ********************************** "Don't want US (as in I and millions of others) to think about" " You made this quote up out of thin air " Speak for yourself, most of us don't need you to speak on our behalf, thank you. " Then seem to be offended by the quote you made up " Besides, your constant rhetoric is beginning to bore some of us. Change the record....... please??" Then back to the standard personal attack. I rarely bother to reply to you because it's always just a person attack. But this one was especially funny. | |||
| |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception." ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative. | |||
"'Expats / emigrants' are people from here that have gone over there. 'Immigrants' are people from over there that have come over here. Which label gets applied to you depends on which country you're standing in. You seem to think that 'immigrant is a bad word used to label people we don't like. You're wrong. You’re only speaking for yourself. To some, the word ‘immigrant’ is definitely a bad word. It's an excellent word to rile up the electorate when something else is going on that the government/press don't want us to think about. Wait no, look at those immigrants over there in that boat. ********************************** "Don't want US (as in I and millions of others) to think about" You made this quote up out of thin air Speak for yourself, most of us don't need you to speak on our behalf, thank you. Then seem to be offended by the quote you made up Besides, your constant rhetoric is beginning to bore some of us. Change the record....... please?? Then back to the standard personal attack. I rarely bother to reply to you because it's always just a person attack. But this one was especially funny." You wrote: don't want us to think about it. Eva added the bracket for context, at no point did she make something up  | |||
"Always a noodle scratcher. Whenever someone comes to this country they are called an immigrant, but whenever we migrate to another country we are called “expats”, surely we should be called immigrants also. Isn’t it time that british immigrants drop the word expat because it’s clearly a term which tries to hide an inconvenient truth. That we go over to countries and do the same thing that immigrants who come here do. Also I’ve heard stories of expats illegally migrating to other countries to evade convictions. Hypocrisy at its finest, or is there nothing to see here? ................................. The other sanitising expression to describe (usually) white immigrants/refugees is emigre. Imagine the small boat refugees being described as such by the Daily Mail. Not (usually), Albanians are mostly white. ................................ My point was the term is rarely, if ever used to describe non-white immigrants." Nor white immigrants. You really should write what you mean. | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative." Shaping emotional reactions from people like you or others? | |||
| |||
| |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. " Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative." I don't dispute that. | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news?" Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative. Shaping emotional reactions from people like you or others?" The poster is just pointing out an evocative context produced by the media. Does it matter whose emotions are evoked? The same has been done to benefit "scroungers". | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative. Shaping emotional reactions from people like you or others? The poster is just pointing out an evocative context produced by the media. Does it matter whose emotions are evoked? The same has been done to benefit "scroungers"." About, not to | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? " Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.  | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though. "But would you like to answer the question? | |||
"As a former expat, it's just a term we call ourselves. In my host countries of China, Hong Kong and Singapore, I was known as Lao Wai, Gwai Lo and Ang Mo respectively. The terms aren't exactly complimentary but nobody cared." Gaijin in Japan. | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?"It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative. Shaping emotional reactions from people like you or others? The poster is just pointing out an evocative context produced by the media. Does it matter whose emotions are evoked? The same has been done to benefit "scroungers"." I understand exactly what the poster is saying. I do not agree with his consistent message of everyone is being manipulated. The poster will deny this as usual, and may even suggest he didn't say it. | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements "I didn't make a statement. I asked a question. | |||
"As a former expat, it's just a term we call ourselves. In my host countries of China, Hong Kong and Singapore, I was known as Lao Wai, Gwai Lo and Ang Mo respectively. The terms aren't exactly complimentary but nobody cared. Gaijin in Japan." Is it a generic term or purely for Brits? As a nation we have used horrid terms for foreigners settling here, according to their country of origin. Example Wop. | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative. Shaping emotional reactions from people like you or others? The poster is just pointing out an evocative context produced by the media. Does it matter whose emotions are evoked? The same has been done to benefit "scroungers". I understand exactly what the poster is saying. I do not agree with his consistent message of everyone is being manipulated. The poster will deny this as usual, and may even suggest he didn't say it." He didn't! It was a couple's profile. | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative. Shaping emotional reactions from people like you or others? The poster is just pointing out an evocative context produced by the media. Does it matter whose emotions are evoked? The same has been done to benefit "scroungers". I understand exactly what the poster is saying. I do not agree with his consistent message of everyone is being manipulated. The poster will deny this as usual, and may even suggest he didn't say it. He didn't! It was a couple's profile." I'm assuming, rightly or wrongly, you're making reference to Johnny. | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative. Shaping emotional reactions from people like you or others? The poster is just pointing out an evocative context produced by the media. Does it matter whose emotions are evoked? The same has been done to benefit "scroungers". I understand exactly what the poster is saying. I do not agree with his consistent message of everyone is being manipulated. The poster will deny this as usual, and may even suggest he didn't say it. He didn't! It was a couple's profile." The profile on this reply was a couples, I’ve made the mistake of thinking it was he. | |||
"Immigration, immigrant, migrating in. Emigration, emigrant, migrating out. Migrant, migrating. Émigré, you'd think it was just a French word for emigrant (I'm sure that's the root of it) but it's one in exile eg political emigrant/refugee. Refugee, fleeing persecution. Not one of these words suggests colour. Not one of these words are derogatory. Anything else is inaccurate perception. ................................. Despite the literal meaning of these words they are used by the media in a context to shape emotional reactions, positive and negative. Shaping emotional reactions from people like you or others? The poster is just pointing out an evocative context produced by the media. Does it matter whose emotions are evoked? The same has been done to benefit "scroungers". I understand exactly what the poster is saying. I do not agree with his consistent message of everyone is being manipulated. The poster will deny this as usual, and may even suggest he didn't say it. He didn't! It was a couple's profile. I'm assuming, rightly or wrongly, you're making reference to Johnny." I have direct quotes to his posts | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
"The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear. The same as a bread roll being called a cob. Do you agree? | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear.
The same as a bread roll being called a cob.
Do you agree? "I agree. What about zucchini? | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear.
The same as a bread roll being called a cob.
Do you agree?
I agree. What about zucchini?"Goes without saying. | |||
"Always a noodle scratcher. Whenever someone comes to this country they are called an immigrant, but whenever we migrate to another country we are called “expats”, surely we should be called immigrants also. Isn’t it time that british immigrants drop the word expat because it’s clearly a term which tries to hide an inconvenient truth. That we go over to countries and do the same thing that immigrants who come here do. Also I’ve heard stories of expats illegally migrating to other countries to evade convictions. Hypocrisy at its finest, or is there nothing to see here? " Why woyld anyone be worried about the terminology used? At least by differentiating we can identify which way the flows are. Not any different to a plumber identifying which way water flows. | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear.
The same as a bread roll being called a cob.
Do you agree? ". Most rational people would agree with you. There may be a very small minority who disagree- probably less than 3,% | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear.
The same as a bread roll being called a cob.
Do you agree?
I agree. What about zucchini?
Goes without saying. "So, Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? | |||
 | |||
| |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear.
The same as a bread roll being called a cob.
Do you agree?
I agree. What about zucchini?
Goes without saying.
So, Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news?"Neither as we agreed and also agreed there was nothing to fear with the other words. Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? | |||
"Sounds like the name of a comedy show: cobs, nobs and zucchinis " | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear.
The same as a bread roll being called a cob.
Do you agree?
I agree. What about zucchini?
Goes without saying.
So, Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news?
Neither as we agreed and also agreed there was nothing to fear with the other words.
Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives?"You said "The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear". To which I agree. Seems neither of us fear immigrants. However we are not necessarily representative of everyone. Have a look around at the way people vote, the things they read in newspapers, the things they post on swingers forums. | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear.
The same as a bread roll being called a cob.
Do you agree?
I agree. What about zucchini?
Goes without saying.
So, Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news?
Neither as we agreed and also agreed there was nothing to fear with the other words.
Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives?
You said "The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear". To which I agree. Seems neither of us fear immigrants. However we are not necessarily representative of everyone. Have a look around at the way people vote, the things they read in newspapers, the things they post on swingers forums.
"I think you will find 99.9% of the population respect and welcome immigrants who come here legally and add benefit to society. This thread was nothing more than bait! Expats being called expats has nothing to do with the situation of people crossing the channel in small boats. If a person from the UK was caught smuggling into a country he would not be called an expat, he would be called an illegal immigrant and a criminal. Like I said the thread is bait | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news? Is it you that is triggered and the rest of us can actually understand the meanings of those words? Can confirm, I am not triggered by "zucchini", "cob" or "immigrants". Thanks for your concern though.
But would you like to answer the question?
It is you that thinks everyone but you is being manipulated by such words, i have nothing to prove, you however do if you are going to make such bold statements
I didn't make a statement. I asked a question.
The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear.
The same as a bread roll being called a cob.
Do you agree?
I agree. What about zucchini?
Goes without saying.
So, Is "cob" used to instill fear in the electorate, or is "zucchini" used to distract people from other news?
Neither as we agreed and also agreed there was nothing to fear with the other words.
Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives?
You said "The word immigration and immigrant are nothing to fear". To which I agree. Seems neither of us fear immigrants. However we are not necessarily representative of everyone. Have a look around at the way people vote, the things they read in newspapers, the things they post on swingers forums.
I think you will find 99.9% of the population respect and welcome immigrants who come here legally and add benefit to society.
This thread was nothing more than bait! Expats being called expats has nothing to do with the situation of people crossing the channel in small boats. If a person from the UK was caught smuggling into a country he would not be called an expat, he would be called an illegal immigrant and a criminal.
Like I said the thread is bait"Hard disagree on "I think you will find 99.9% of the population respect and welcome immigrants who come here legally and add benefit to society." Only a few years ago fear of immigration was used as a tool to encourage people to vote to leave the EU. | |||
"My point was the term is rarely, if ever used to describe non-white immigrants." Really? I see people complaining about immigrants arriving in small boats. I don't see anyone discussing the colour of their skin or their country of origin. | |||
"'Expats / emigrants' are people from here that have gone over there. 'Immigrants' are people from over there that have come over here. Which label gets applied to you depends on which country you're standing in. You seem to think that 'immigrant is a bad word used to label people we don't like. You're wrong. You’re only speaking for yourself. To some, the word ‘immigrant’ is definitely a bad word. It's an excellent word to rile up the electorate when something else is going on that the government/press don't want us to think about. Wait no, look at those immigrants over there in that boat. ********************************** "Don't want US (as in I and millions of others) to think about" You made this quote up out of thin air Speak for yourself, most of us don't need you to speak on our behalf, thank you. Then seem to be offended by the quote you made up Besides, your constant rhetoric is beginning to bore some of us. Change the record....... please?? Then back to the standard personal attack. I rarely bother to reply to you because it's always just a person attack. But this one was especially funny." *********************************** Off you go, as usual with your standard 'rebuke' as you have practised on here as long as I remember. OK, let's see if I can 'offend' or 'outrage' you more, shall I..?? (oops, precede the two above words with 'faux', if you would, thank you). Right. * 1) You're either forgetful, impetuous or posting 'porkies' when you write...... * "You made this quote up out of thin air" (Source, c&p below, verbatim) * {It's an excellent word to rile up the electorate when something else is going on that the government/press DON'T WANT US TO THINK ABOUT. Wait no, look at those immigrants over there in that boat} * Above is a section of your original post to which I replied. My own additional words in brackets were meant to show my annoyance with you for attempting speaking on my behalf, as explained to you now, which rules out 2), (ref from my post), * Speak for yourself, most of us don't need you to speak on our behalf, thank you. * Which I meant most definitely, i.e., don't ever involve either myself or others with your crackpot thinking. You are a nightmare to reply to here. Almost every time either I or some other contributor calls you out for your remarks you play the victim card, the 'offended', the poor chap who always gets picked on, seemingly. Maybe, you indeed DO have some psycological condition which is manifest this way as I've noticed you have also accused others of 'attacking' you, when all we are doing is debating or, occasionally, pointing out and refuting your outbursts. My sincere apologies if you have such an attitude toward others. Regarding my posts, I have NEVER 'personally attacked' you here and I never shall. And, (at last..!) FINALLY..., I just find it beyond funny when I read some Walter Mitty type post from anyone, besides yourself. The 'change the record' salvo of mine was a good natured attempt to remind you of the fact you do at times repeat the same old lines when you really ought to cease with fanciful and groundless outbursts, they can be rather embarrassing to many. Good afternoon. | |||
"Get a room you two zucchinis "******************************** (His) sidekick went 'U.N.L.O.S. some while back, there was a glut of 's floating about the site for some time after...... | |||
"'Expats / emigrants' are people from here that have gone over there. 'Immigrants' are people from over there that have come over here. Which label gets applied to you depends on which country you're standing in. You seem to think that 'immigrant is a bad word used to label people we don't like. You're wrong. You’re only speaking for yourself. To some, the word ‘immigrant’ is definitely a bad word. It's an excellent word to rile up the electorate when something else is going on that the government/press don't want us to think about. Wait no, look at those immigrants over there in that boat. ********************************** "Don't want US (as in I and millions of others) to think about" You made this quote up out of thin air Speak for yourself, most of us don't need you to speak on our behalf, thank you. Then seem to be offended by the quote you made up Besides, your constant rhetoric is beginning to bore some of us. Change the record....... please?? Then back to the standard personal attack. I rarely bother to reply to you because it's always just a person attack. But this one was especially funny. You wrote: don't want us to think about it. Eva added the bracket for context, at no point did she make something up "************************ Thanks Fiesty, just now seen your post.  | |||
"Get a room you two zucchinis
********************************
(His) sidekick went 'U.N.L.O.S. some while back, there was a glut of 's floating about the site for some time after......"Don't you think 66 and Johnny make a "fine" duo? They'd have fun in a room together . | |||
| |||
"I don't know about you lot, but I've always considered 'expat' to be an insult. It's used to describe that sort of Brit that goes to live abroad, but refuses to integrate. A good example is the sort of Brit that lives in Spain, but only speaks English, and lives with a whole load of other Brits, and spends most of their time moaning about how the locals are all lazy and the shops are never open in the afternoons." Not my take on it. Some of you people put a great deal of unwarranted info into words - it's how we get stereotypes, which lead to prejudice. | |||
"I don't know about you lot, but I've always considered 'expat' to be an insult. It's used to describe that sort of Brit that goes to live abroad, but refuses to integrate. A good example is the sort of Brit that lives in Spain, but only speaks English, and lives with a whole load of other Brits, and spends most of their time moaning about how the locals are all lazy and the shops are never open in the afternoons."
Egg n chips and 8 lagers pour favor | |||
"Get a room you two zucchinis
********************************
(His) sidekick went 'U.N.L.O.S. some while back, there was a glut of 's floating about the site for some time after......
Don't you think 66 and Johnny make a "fine" duo? They'd have fun in a room together ."Thanks Cilla
I'm afraid he has a little something I'm not so keen on  | |||
"Get a room you two zucchinis
********************************
(His) sidekick went 'U.N.L.O.S. some while back, there was a glut of 's floating about the site for some time after......
Don't you think 66 and Johnny make a "fine" duo? They'd have fun in a room together .
Thanks Cilla
I'm afraid he has a little something I'm not so keen on "His zucchini is green? | |||
Let's call the boat ppl illegal expats. | |||
"I don't know about you lot, but I've always considered 'expat' to be an insult. It's used to describe that sort of Brit that goes to live abroad, but refuses to integrate. A good example is the sort of Brit that lives in Spain, but only speaks English, and lives with a whole load of other Brits, and spends most of their time moaning about how the locals are all lazy and the shops are never open in the afternoons." There is also a group of Brits(and Europeans) in the other extreme. They visit India/Nepal for a week and go back claiming that they had a spiritual experience and have converted to Hinduism/Buddhism. What????? | |||
"Get a room you two zucchinis
********************************
(His) sidekick went 'U.N.L.O.S. some while back, there was a glut of 's floating about the site for some time after......
Don't you think 66 and Johnny make a "fine" duo? They'd have fun in a room together .
Thanks Cilla
I'm afraid he has a little something I'm not so keen on "******************************* Me neither... To quote Michael Caine's character from The Eagle Has Landed....... "Reminds me of something I occasionally pick up on my shoe from the gutter..... Very unpleasant on a hot day....." As for this proposed "double act" I predict sell out success....(?!!) | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. " And in some corners they called the Nazis socialist. Who’d have thunk it? | |||
"In some parts of the UK they call a bread roll a cob. In the US they call a courgette a zucchini. And in some corners they called the Nazis socialist. Who’d have thunk it? " did they eat zucchini cobs? | |||
"Get a room you two zucchinis
********************************
(His) sidekick went 'U.N.L.O.S. some while back, there was a glut of 's floating about the site for some time after......
Don't you think 66 and Johnny make a "fine" duo? They'd have fun in a room together .
Thanks Cilla
I'm afraid he has a little something I'm not so keen on
*******************************
Me neither...
To quote Michael Caine's character from The Eagle Has Landed.......
"Reminds me of something I occasionally pick up on my shoe from the gutter.....
Very unpleasant on a hot day....."
As for this proposed "double act"
I predict sell out success....(?!!)
"Sorry folks but coming cold into this thread, it does feel a bit like a pile on. Clever avoidance of direct insults to ensure no sanctions from the moderators, but a lot of passive aggressive posts and implied insults nonetheless. Surely we are all better than that? | |||
"Get a room you two zucchinis
********************************
(His) sidekick went 'U.N.L.O.S. some while back, there was a glut of 's floating about the site for some time after......
Don't you think 66 and Johnny make a "fine" duo? They'd have fun in a room together .
Thanks Cilla
I'm afraid he has a little something I'm not so keen on
*******************************
Me neither...
To quote Michael Caine's character from The Eagle Has Landed.......
"Reminds me of something I occasionally pick up on my shoe from the gutter.....
Very unpleasant on a hot day....."
As for this proposed "double act"
I predict sell out success....(?!!)
Sorry folks but coming cold into this thread, it does feel a bit like a pile on. Clever avoidance of direct insults to ensure no sanctions from the moderators, but a lot of passive aggressive posts and implied insults nonetheless. Surely we are all better than that? "Or inferred insults. It's good to keep it light-hearted. If people don't like my humour... Tough. I've honed it over fifty years | |||
| |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives?" I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. | |||
| |||
"'Expats / emigrants' are people from here that have gone over there. 'Immigrants' are people from over there that have come over here. Which label gets applied to you depends on which country you're standing in. You seem to think that 'immigrant is a bad word used to label people we don't like. You're wrong." 100% | |||
"Get a room you two zucchinis
********************************
(His) sidekick went 'U.N.L.O.S. some while back, there was a glut of 's floating about the site for some time after......
Don't you think 66 and Johnny make a "fine" duo? They'd have fun in a room together .
Thanks Cilla
I'm afraid he has a little something I'm not so keen on
His zucchini is green?"That he has a zucchini whatever the colour and I’m pretty sure Johnny is not going to be keen on my zucchini either  | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is." It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. " I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. " I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. " We have a public who watch love island and consistently votes tory against their own interests. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. We have a public who watch love island and consistently votes tory against their own interests. "
I shouldn't laugh but it's true  (the voting bit). | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. " This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. " Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. We have a public who watch love island and consistently votes tory against their own interests.
I shouldn't laugh but it's true (the voting bit)."I have an extreme loathing of reality TV and the damage that I believe it does to society. Bread and circuses, that’s all it is. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. " The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. We have a public who watch love island and consistently votes tory against their own interests.
I shouldn't laugh but it's true (the voting bit).
I have an extreme loathing of reality TV and the damage that I believe it does to society. Bread and circuses, that’s all it is. "I comprehend. A dumbing down of the masses. However, my go to reality TV is Gogglebox | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. We have a public who watch love island and consistently votes tory against their own interests.
I shouldn't laugh but it's true (the voting bit)."******************************** Oh, I laughed, I do love a stern comment of 'factual facilitation', as I have eventually labelled such statements. Some folk really ought to learn to discern 'facts' from 'opinions' for example, * "A public who watch xxxxxxxx" Is written in a factual sense. In reality it is asserting ALL the public watch xxxxxxxx * The correct statement would be to offer it as a personal opinion or, possibly temper the statement with 'A good number of the public.... etc' and maybe end with 'in my opinion', to put a nice cherry on top...(!) * "A good number of people seem to be watching xxxxxxxx I think" * More acceptable, to myself for one. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. We have a public who watch love island and consistently votes tory against their own interests.
I shouldn't laugh but it's true (the voting bit).
********************************
Oh, I laughed, I do love a stern comment of 'factual facilitation', as I have eventually labelled such statements.
Some folk really ought to learn to discern 'facts' from 'opinions' for example,
*
"A public who watch xxxxxxxx"
Is written in a factual sense. In reality it is asserting ALL the public watch xxxxxxxx
*
The correct statement would be to offer it as a personal opinion or, possibly temper the statement with 'A good number of the public.... etc' and maybe end with 'in my opinion', to put a nice cherry on top...(!)
*
"A good number of people seem to be watching xxxxxxxx I think"
*
More acceptable, to myself for one. "Many people compose posts in short hand, IE omit clarifiers such as many, most, all, some. Expecting readers to self clarify. For example, I'm not assuming all people who watch love island vote Tory. Not all who vote Tory vote against their own interests. Not all Tory voters watch love island. My own unclarified post is made on the basis I have known people who vote Tory against their own interests because their parents did  .
If you seek clarification, ask questions, it's more polite than telling someone how to compose a thread. | |||
| |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. " You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. " Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better."We have already discussed media slants. They really weren't mostly right wing (not the top 10 anyway) | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better.
We have already discussed media slants. They really weren't mostly right wing (not the top 10 anyway)"Yes fair point. Although the numbers change if you accept the BBC is neutral not left and the Inde is central not left. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better.
We have already discussed media slants. They really weren't mostly right wing (not the top 10 anyway)
Yes fair point. Although the numbers change if you accept the BBC is neutral not left and the Inde is central not left."I think we concluded that the BBC was neutral. If we rank the Independent as Neutral (its not) then we would be split down the middle. Certainly not MOSTLY right wing, which is the usual calls from people (on the left) | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better.
We have already discussed media slants. They really weren't mostly right wing (not the top 10 anyway)
Yes fair point. Although the numbers change if you accept the BBC is neutral not left and the Inde is central not left.
I think we concluded that the BBC was neutral. If we rank the Independent as Neutral (its not) then we would be split down the middle.
Certainly not MOSTLY right wing, which is the usual calls from people (on the left)"Of course those figures do not account for people with multiple channel consumption | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better.
We have already discussed media slants. They really weren't mostly right wing (not the top 10 anyway)
Yes fair point. Although the numbers change if you accept the BBC is neutral not left and the Inde is central not left.
I think we concluded that the BBC was neutral. If we rank the Independent as Neutral (its not) then we would be split down the middle.
Certainly not MOSTLY right wing, which is the usual calls from people (on the left)
Of course those figures do not account for people with multiple channel consumption "Of course you're gonna try to twist them so they agree with you
That thread was about perceptions, as well as media bias fact checking. go back and have a read. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better.
We have already discussed media slants. They really weren't mostly right wing (not the top 10 anyway)
Yes fair point. Although the numbers change if you accept the BBC is neutral not left and the Inde is central not left.
I think we concluded that the BBC was neutral. If we rank the Independent as Neutral (its not) then we would be split down the middle.
Certainly not MOSTLY right wing, which is the usual calls from people (on the left)
Of course those figures do not account for people with multiple channel consumption
Of course you're gonna try to twist them so they agree with you
That thread was about perceptions, as well as media bias fact checking. go back and have a read."I’m not disagreeing with you (apart from The Independent).  | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better.
We have already discussed media slants. They really weren't mostly right wing (not the top 10 anyway)
Yes fair point. Although the numbers change if you accept the BBC is neutral not left and the Inde is central not left.
I think we concluded that the BBC was neutral. If we rank the Independent as Neutral (its not) then we would be split down the middle.
Certainly not MOSTLY right wing, which is the usual calls from people (on the left)"That was an interesting thread and showed that its not as clear cut as some would like you to believe | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. " I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with." That's just it, if they're not engaged, they won't know when something happens they're not happy with, and it's much easier to distract and misdirect them. We see it happening constantly, as you mentioned they "instigate change en masse", and vote for more of the same shit. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with." I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP." Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other?" It’s always interesting to see how a forum post takes a veritable tour through peoples streams of consciousness, from my original post about double standards and terminology, through to the wording of bread and vegetables all the way to to why people don’t know their local MP’s names. The one thing I enjoy the most when posting here is the wonderful discussions. What magnificent creatures we all are. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other?" It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion." I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly?" If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)?" The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. | |||
"If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)?" They don't need to know anything until it comes to election time. Then the various politicians will make sure that everyone is aware of all the flaws in their opponents' arguments well in advance of the vote. Most people have no need to follow politics at all. | |||
" I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. " No it’s absolutely understandable for some people to vote Tory. The very wealthy 1% would be mad to do anything else. | |||
" I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. No it’s absolutely understandable for some people to vote Tory. The very wealthy 1% would be mad to do anything else. " Unless of course they had empathy for other humans. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. " What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so? | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so?" I understand people have different values and ideas that do not align to me. I accept this, I still scratch my head at times, but I respect other views and do not expect my values and ideas to trump everyone who thinks differently.I’m talking politics, not hate or anything else. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so? I understand people have different values and ideas that do not align to me. I accept this, I still scratch my head at times, but I respect other views and do not expect my values and ideas to trump everyone who thinks differently.I’m talking politics, not hate or anything else. " Okay. But that doesn't answer the question at all. It's not a matter of values, I don't understand where that comes into it. | |||
" I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. No it’s absolutely understandable for some people to vote Tory. The very wealthy 1% would be mad to do anything else. " To be fair I think there is more nuance than that. There is a mix of economic and social policies to consider. I would also say that maybe the top 10-20% might benefit from the Tories not only the top 1%. Below that, I can only really conclude that social policies trump (and are more tangible) economic policies and factor in aspiration to move up into a higher wealth group? Much of the core voter base for the Tories are retired and (interestingly) those who were children under Thatcher. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better.". It is difficult to see what possible relevance someone's financial status has to what is published . As far as I am aware the proprietors do not write the articles themselves, journalists do. Newspapers that I read report facts and columnists will intrepet the data . Arguments for and against most various points are usually presented aa well. | |||
| |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so? I understand people have different values and ideas that do not align to me. I accept this, I still scratch my head at times, but I respect other views and do not expect my values and ideas to trump everyone who thinks differently.I’m talking politics, not hate or anything else. Okay. But that doesn't answer the question at all. It's not a matter of values, I don't understand where that comes into it." It is about values, I don’t expect the vast majority of people to worry about every political decision, that is not disengaged. They engage when an election comes along or a policy impacts them. I can accept that, and I don’t see it as an easily manipulated public | |||
| |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. This is usual rhetoric from the left. Everyone is gullible except them, it's sad that they think that way but you won't change their minds. Didn’t your delve into the political compass reveal you to be on ‘the left’? Who are ‘the left’? I’ve met some lefties who are thick as fuck, wanting to overthrow capitalism and turn the U.K into an unconnected, standalone socialist state. I’ve met others who are capable of obscenely high level thought that frankly embarrasses even the smartest onlooker. Similarly on the right, some are unbelievably clever, even if I don’t agree with them. Others are like Yaxley-Lennon and his thugs. When you say ‘the left’ or ‘the right’ as if there are an analogous blob, you weaken your entire stance. You are correct that my political compass was left of centre, I'd argue it was further towards centre than it was to left. When I say left, I mean left, not left of centre. You are also correct that there are plenty of people left and right who are very smart, not you, because you call people 'thick as fuck', which is quite ironic whilst telling me I weaken my stance. To finish, the only people who I see complaining about the (coercive) power of media are people who are left. People on the right possibly do too but I definitely don't see it on here. Jumping in on that last point (is that allowed? Is it a pile on ?)
If news outlets like The Daily Mail, The Express, and The Sun decided to shift to a left wing bias, you would soon start seeing people on the right complaining.
Most of the media is owned by billionaires. Billionaires tend to have more right wing views generally as that will protect their interests better.. It is difficult to see what possible relevance someone's financial status has to what is published .
As far as I am aware the proprietors do not write the articles themselves, journalists do.
Newspapers that I read report facts and columnists will intrepet the data . Arguments for and against most various points are usually presented aa well. "Of course Pat. That is precisely how it works. The moon is also made of cheese | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so? I understand people have different values and ideas that do not align to me. I accept this, I still scratch my head at times, but I respect other views and do not expect my values and ideas to trump everyone who thinks differently.I’m talking politics, not hate or anything else. Okay. But that doesn't answer the question at all. It's not a matter of values, I don't understand where that comes into it. It is about values, I don’t expect the vast majority of people to worry about every political decision, that is not disengaged. They engage when an election comes along or a policy impacts them. I can accept that, and I don’t see it as an easily manipulated public " Are you suggesting that it's values like. Disaster capitalism, crushing the working class with austerity, tax avoidance for the ultra wealthy? I'm struggling to understand what you're saying. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so? I understand people have different values and ideas that do not align to me. I accept this, I still scratch my head at times, but I respect other views and do not expect my values and ideas to trump everyone who thinks differently.I’m talking politics, not hate or anything else. Okay. But that doesn't answer the question at all. It's not a matter of values, I don't understand where that comes into it. It is about values, I don’t expect the vast majority of people to worry about every political decision, that is not disengaged. They engage when an election comes along or a policy impacts them. I can accept that, and I don’t see it as an easily manipulated public Are you suggesting that it's values like. Disaster capitalism, crushing the working class with austerity, tax avoidance for the ultra wealthy? I'm struggling to understand what you're saying." Or refusing to understand? | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so? I understand people have different values and ideas that do not align to me. I accept this, I still scratch my head at times, but I respect other views and do not expect my values and ideas to trump everyone who thinks differently.I’m talking politics, not hate or anything else. Okay. But that doesn't answer the question at all. It's not a matter of values, I don't understand where that comes into it. It is about values, I don’t expect the vast majority of people to worry about every political decision, that is not disengaged. They engage when an election comes along or a policy impacts them. I can accept that, and I don’t see it as an easily manipulated public Are you suggesting that it's values like. Disaster capitalism, crushing the working class with austerity, tax avoidance for the ultra wealthy? I'm struggling to understand what you're saying. Or refusing to understand?" Genuinely don't understand the point. It sounds like you're suggesting people voluntarily, knowingly vote for these kind of things. As opposed to being easily manipulated by being disengaged from the whole process. | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so? I understand people have different values and ideas that do not align to me. I accept this, I still scratch my head at times, but I respect other views and do not expect my values and ideas to trump everyone who thinks differently.I’m talking politics, not hate or anything else. Okay. But that doesn't answer the question at all. It's not a matter of values, I don't understand where that comes into it. It is about values, I don’t expect the vast majority of people to worry about every political decision, that is not disengaged. They engage when an election comes along or a policy impacts them. I can accept that, and I don’t see it as an easily manipulated public Are you suggesting that it's values like. Disaster capitalism, crushing the working class with austerity, tax avoidance for the ultra wealthy? I'm struggling to understand what you're saying. Or refusing to understand? Genuinely don't understand the point. It sounds like you're suggesting people voluntarily, knowingly vote for these kind of things. As opposed to being easily manipulated by being disengaged from the whole process." They are disengaged for long periods of time and engage in politics when something impacts them directly. Manipulated? I don’t think so, you believe they are because the party you despise and for the life of you can’t understand why someone would vote for, attracted the majority vote over the last 13 years. Believe it or not, I watch from the side lines and see this disbelief, I also see a lot of theories why this must be happening from those who wouldn’t vote Tory, it always boils down to the electorate being manipulated or stupid. If labour win the next GE, is that everyone waking up and the manipulators losing control? | |||
"Who are these people that are having fear instilled into their lives? I think you'll find they are the general public. I know of at least one national newspaper that has a "weekly briefing" amongst their staff. Attendance is compulsory. The chair of the meeting begins with "How do you want to make people feel this week?" Someone will say, "Angry. Pissed off" and someone else will say "Keep the pressure on the boat crossings." Someone else will say, "Hopeful" Another will add, "Run a commiserative story about the England Football Team, and how we are all proud of them. Focus on what they achieved and what they could achieve in the future". etc etc etc If that's not "manipulation", I don't know what is. It is not exactly the instilling fear is it? I don't think you give the general public enough credit. I think you give the general public too much credit. The power of the media (including social media) has been demonstrated time and again. I have no doubt about the power and influence. I just don’t buy into the story that we have so many people who can’t see that too. The evidence would suggest otherwise. Large portions of the general public are just not politically engaged. I agree with the lack of political engagement overall, but can you blame people for not being engaged until things effect them directly? They have outsourced their rights as have we to our MP's, it's a managed service that is under contract for 5 years. This doesn't mean people are dumb or easily led, rather the opposite! The majority know when it is time for change, they instigate the change on mass and then settle back down and et on with their lives until something happens they are not happy with. I suspect that quite a sizeable chunk of the population couldn’t even tell you the name of their MP. Which would indicate what? Content with life, ignorance or other? It would indicate that they’re not politically engaged, as per the discussion. I will ask again, why do they need to be other than when it comes to decisions that will impact them directly? If they’re not politically engaged how are they aware of decisions that will impact them directly (until it’s too late)? The general public tend to know when they don’t like something, they’re more engaged than you think. We keep going round the houses on this very subject… You and others on here repeat the the same thing over and over again, because you honestly believe that anyone who votes Tory is self harming and therefore not engaged or being fed lies to keep them voting. You also apply the same set of ideas towards anyone who voted for Brexit. If we look at this from a different angle, it could be said you are the ones who are not engaged, being influenced by radical news stories and people that make you outliers. I’m not saying you are as I think that is a ridiculous thing to say, but I also think the idea that people who vote Tory are self harming and being duped is equally ridiculous. What is your view, if you're saying the point of view that people vote Tory/Brexit isn't to do with being disengaged from politics and thus more easily distracted and misdirected. Why is it so? I understand people have different values and ideas that do not align to me. I accept this, I still scratch my head at times, but I respect other views and do not expect my values and ideas to trump everyone who thinks differently.I’m talking politics, not hate or anything else. Okay. But that doesn't answer the question at all. It's not a matter of values, I don't understand where that comes into it. It is about values, I don’t expect the vast majority of people to worry about every political decision, that is not disengaged. They engage when an election comes along or a policy impacts them. I can accept that, and I don’t see it as an easily manipulated public Are you suggesting that it's values like. Disaster capitalism, crushing the working class with austerity, tax avoidance for the ultra wealthy? I'm struggling to understand what you're saying. Or refusing to understand? Genuinely don't understand the point. It sounds like you're suggesting people voluntarily, knowingly vote for these kind of things. As opposed to being easily manipulated by being disengaged from the whole process. They are disengaged for long periods of time and engage in politics when something impacts them directly. Manipulated? I don’t think so, you believe they are because the party you despise and for the life of you can’t understand why someone would vote for, attracted the majority vote over the last 13 years. Believe it or not, I watch from the side lines and see this disbelief, I also see a lot of theories why this must be happening from those who wouldn’t vote Tory, it always boils down to the electorate being manipulated or stupid. If labour win the next GE, is that everyone waking up and the manipulators losing control? " This is all well and good. But I am interested in what your alternative theory is for people voting Tory over and over. If Labour win, it's because they out Toried the Tories and those with the money who the system works for, might decide that Labour will serve their purposes better. Can't see it happening to be honest. | |||
