A Political Thread pt. 2

[Ragey Erasmus]

Yeah, to be honest, 90% of democrats would be Tories if you brought them over here. So funny when you hear republicans describe the Dems as socialist. If you're American your 2 political choices every election is Tory (Dems) and Alt right/Religious zealot/voter surpressing/gun loving/evolution denying nut jobs (GOP)

Socialist is the new "Commie" for the GOP, just a buzzword to explain anything mildly to the left of where they are. In reality 99% of Americans are utterly clueless about political ideologies, even their own. The far right are limited to thinking the 1st and 2nd amendment have no bounds at all and that tax breaks should go to those who least need it whilst the moderate left think there are some bounds to the 1st and 2nd amendment and that it's ok to tax and spend a bit. I don't think they really discuss anything else.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Socialist is the new "Commie" for the GOP, just a buzzword to explain anything mildly to the left of where they are. In reality 99% of Americans are utterly clueless about political ideologies, even their own. The far right are limited to thinking the 1st and 2nd amendment have no bounds at all and that tax breaks should go to those who least need it whilst the moderate left think there are some bounds to the 1st and 2nd amendment and that it's ok to tax and spend a bit. I don't think they really discuss anything else.

I have a feeling me and you will agree a lot with each other on political issues. Well, at least more than we do on rugby.

 

[Which Tyler]

So annoying when you hear the Christian fundamentalists say this rubbish. In fact god has a lot to answer for as you hear a lot of Americans say "it's my god given right to bare arms" and they genuinely believe that crap.

I typically facilate between Atheism (no gods exist) and Antitheism (if a god does exist, then they deserve condemnation, not worship - at least for the holier-than-thou, omniscient/ominpotent genocidal monotheistic variety)

 

[Welsh Exile]

I typically facilate between Ahteism (no gods exist) and Antitheism (if a god does exist, then they deserve condemnation, not worship)

Yeah, its mad to me and I've got a couple of pretty devout believers in my family. I'm probably more on the militant atheist side of things but people can believe what they want obviously as long as the don't shove it down my throat and as long as they keep that nonsense out of schools brainwashing children.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I typically facilate between Ahteism (no gods exist) and Antitheism (if a god does exist, then they deserve condemnation, not worship - at least for the holier-than-thou, omniscient/ominpotent genocidal monotheistic variety)

I thought Ahteism was where any time you ask for someone to explain God they just go "aaah" and nod their head solemnly tutting away about mysterious ways.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Atheism is a lack of belief in gods,
That's the definition I see more these days.

 

[Which Tyler]

I thought Ahteism was where any time you ask for someone to explain God they just go "aaah" and nod their head solemnly tutting away about mysterious ways.

I've alwasy said - if I had a superpower, I'd be typoman! writing wrongs werever I go

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Boulder shooting: Gunman kills 10 at King Soopers grocery store

A police officer who was the first to respond to the attack is confirmed as one of the victims.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sad thing is I no longer bat an eye lid when there's another mass shooting news story in the US.

One aspect of normal life that we really didn't want to see resume.

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Welsh Exile]

I forgot to put climate change deniers in my earlier list of republican traits.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Laughable excuse from Sydney Powell's legal team.

 

[McTallshort]

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

View attachment 10175

I mean, he's not a climate change denier tho is he...


He doesn't think we're at immenent risk of death but he's supported bills in the past which set out very clearly that he thinks humans are at least partially responsible

 

[Welsh Exile]

I mean, he's not a climate change denier tho is he...


He doesn't think we're at immenent risk of death but he's supported bills in the past which set out very clearly that he thinks humans are at least partially responsible

What was his stance on Trump pulling out of the Paris Agreement? Genuine question.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

What was his stance on Trump pulling out of the Paris Agreement? Genuine question.

What was his stance on Trump pulling out of the Paris Agreement? Genuine question.

He lobbied for withdrawal I belive - but again I really wouldn't read into that a huge amount, I know plenty of environmentalists who were supportive of the US withdrawal simply because it is a largely symbolic agreement that arguably does more harm than good (I'm not saying I neccessairly agree but the argument does have some merit).

It frustrates a lot of market environemtnalists (not saying Paul is one, but his rhetoric over the PCA is similar to theirs) because it seems to prioritize negative action over trying to grow the economy and protect the environemnt in symbiosis - you can see why a lot of republicans especially would be in opposition to it, and why Paul's relationship with the environemntal debate gets quite radical when it comes at the expense of the livelihoods of the most vulnerable in the short term. It almost seems like he's been pushed further into the "kick the can down the road camp" as a result of being called a climate denier when he tries to protect jobs - it gets very cyclical.

It doesn't help the environmental debate to label anyone critical of the Paris agreement, XR, Greta etc as just "climate deniers" (seems to happen a lot) as the market environementalist argument seems to evoke for some reason.

Personally, market environmentalism and the work of the British Conservation Alliance and the American Conservation Coalition have always been more attractive to me than most of the policies we've seen in recent years, but that's just personal prefrence.

 

[Welsh Exile]

He lobbied for withdrawal I belive - but again I really wouldn't read into that a huge amount, I know plenty of environmentalists who were supportive of the US withdrawal simply because it is a largely symbolic agreement that arguably does more harm than good (I'm not saying I neccessairly agree but the argument does have some merit).

It frustrates a lot of market environemtnalists (not saying Paul is one, but his rhetoric over the PCA is similar to theirs) because it seems to prioritize negative action over trying to grow the economy and protect the environemnt in symbiosis - you can see why a lot of republicans especially would be in opposition to it, and why Paul's relationship with the environemntal debate gets quite radical when it comes at the expense of the livelihoods of the most vulnerable in the short term. It almost seems like he's been pushed further into the "kick the can down the road camp" as a result of being called a climate denier when he tries to protect jobs - it gets very cyclical.

It doesn't help the environmental debate to label anyone critical of the Paris agreement, XR, Greta etc as just "climate deniers" (seems to happen a lot) as the market environementalist argument seems to evoke for some reason.

Personally, market environmentalism and the work of the British Conservation Alliance and the American Conservation Coalition have always been more attractive to me than most of the policies we've seen in recent years, but that's just personal prefrence.

So he lobbied to pull out (ohh matron)

Who are these environmentalists who supported withdraw?

The cynic in me would lead me to believe he's been influenced by the very powerful Fossil Fuel lobby in America.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

So he lobbied to pull out (ohh matron)

Who are these environmentalists who supported withdraw?

The cynic in me would lead me to believe he's been influenced by the very powerful Fossil Fuel lobby in America.

Again, not too uncommon in market-environmentalist circles - as nice as it is to have a public committment to dealing with climate change, the agreement itself is deeply flawed, very costly and arguably doesn't justify that cost with benefits that it is likely to achieve - there are much better ways to help the environment than the Paris Climate Agreement.

On the latter point, yeah that wouldn't surprise me either, and jobs are also going to play a huge part in terms of winning elections in the immediate term but honestly that's par for the course in the US at the moment - there are very few people doing anything thats productive - it's almost always either vested interest (fossil fuel subsidies still being a thing) or lip service and **** policy that ultimately hurts the most vulnerable and does little to nothing beneficial (green new deal).

To go back to my first point, it's not helpful to pigeonhole people like Paul as "climate deniers" when their concerns have some merit - the only way we'll see genuine progress is through common sense solutions that adress the socio-economic factors within the climate debate and bringing people into the centre ground, where we can protect the socio-economically vulnerable through maintained econonic growth, but protect the environment at the same time - the two aren't mutually exclusive

 

[Welsh Exile]

Again, not too uncommon in market-environmentalist circles - as nice as it is to have a public committment to dealing with climate change, the agreement itself is deeply flawed, very costly and arguably doesn't justify that cost with benefits that it is likely to achieve - there are much better ways to help the environment than the Paris Climate Agreement.

On the latter point, yeah that wouldn't surprise me either, and jobs are also going to play a huge part in terms of winning elections in the immediate term but honestly that's par for the course in the US at the moment - there are very few people doing anything thats productive - it's almost always either vested interest (fossil fuel subsidies still being a thing) or lip service and **** policy that ultimately hurts the most vulnerable and does little to nothing beneficial (green new deal).

To go back to my first point, it's not helpful to pigeonhole people like Paul as "climate deniers" when their concerns have some merit - the only way we'll see genuine progress is through common sense solutions that adress the socio-economic factors within the climate debate and bringing people into the centre ground, where we can protect the socio-economically vulnerable through maintained econonic growth, but protect the environment at the same time - the two aren't mutually exclusive

Yeah a lot of that is fair. I don't think any global thing like this is ever perfect and I have seen a lot of climate change scientists that say we need to do a lot more than outlined in the Paris Agreement but that doesn't necessarily mean that withdrawing from it is the best thing either. I only asked for names as I'm pretty ignorant about this stuff really but also from what I read and hear the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists are in agreement about climate change and the effect we're having. But that is certainly different to them all being in agreement about then Paris Agreement as they may differ on the best ways to reduce emissions.

To be honest I don't know enough about his motivations behind lobbying to pull out to comment but you're right, seeing as he doesn't deny climate change is a thing it's not fair to label him as such.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Yeah a lot of that is fair. I don't think any global thing like this is ever perfect and I have seen a lot of climate change scientists that say we need to do a lot more than outlined in the Paris Agreement but that doesn't necessarily mean that withdrawing from it is the best thing either. I only asked for names as I'm pretty ignorant about this stuff really but also from what I read and hear the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists are in agreement about climate change and the effect we're having. But that is certainly different to them all being in agreement about then Paris Agreement as they may differ on the best ways to reduce emissions.

To be honest I don't know enough about his motivations behind lobbying to pull out to comment but you're right, seeing as he doesn't deny climate change is a thing it's not fair to label him as such.

The ACC are a decent example in the US - although they only released one public statement as far as I know

https://www.acc.eco/blog/2019/11/4/press-release-the-american-conservation-coalition-responds-to-president-trump-beginning-withdrawal-from-paris-climate-accord.

Honestly do have a little look at the BCA and ACC platforms though, both are really promising organisations doing some great stuff!

 

[Gavin]

UK Government buildings to fly union flag every day - BBC News

The culture secretary described the flag as "a proud reminder of our history and the ties that bind us".

www.bbc.co.uk

All UK government buildings in England, Wales and Scotland will fly the union flag every day, following new guidance from the culture department.

Currently flags are only required to be flown on certain days such as the Queen's birthday.

Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden described the flag as "a proud reminder of our history and the ties that bind us".

*Except Northern Ireland