Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz66]

I love the term "Liberals". It must be the greatest misnomer ever. I've experienced 4 years of "Liberal" posts on Brexit. They're the most intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like people you could (not) wish to meet.

Your problem here is that of lack of clarity of thought. Because some who had a different view to you on Brexit were "intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like people" you make a false correlation between not supporting Brexit and these traits. Yet you must know that there were those who supported Brexit who were also "intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like people" just as there were those who did not who were not "intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like people". What you should be identifying as 'bad' is behaviour that is "intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like" and condemning it regardless of it comes from brexit supporters or not, from the left or the right.

It is the same with the protesters. There were protesters in London gathered under the banner of 'protecting statues and monuments'. Some were good decent people, WW2 veterans. Some were right wing fascist hooligan thugs one of which literary pissed on a monument. Using your 'system' above it would be easy to tar all the 'protect our statues' counter protesters as 'right wing fascist hooligan thugs' because that suits a particular political agenda and narrative. Which is exactly what you do when you and people like Maximus tar all those protesting against excessive police brutality and excessive police brutality targeted based on ethnicity as 'fascists pretending to be anti fascists'.

Either identify the commonality that is wrong and apply it equally to all groups, those that you are supportive of personally and those you are not or be seen for what you are, someone who just complains about something when it is done by those you are not aligned with and ignores it when done by those you are aligned with. IE someone driven by partisanship and little else.

[Maximus]

For your information Erolz,

I am well aware that there are people protesting the death of George Floyd that have not committed any crimes.

I am talking generally about the "liberal" left in response to Kik's asking why anyone in their right mind would vote for Trump.

Simply, because the democrats have lost their minds.

Not because I am a trump fan but because today's (left) democrats have made me like and trust them far less.

[erolz66]

For your information Erolz,

I am well aware that there are people protesting the death of George Floyd that have not committed any crimes.

I am talking generally about the "liberal" left in response to Kik's asking why anyone in their right mind would vote for Trump.

Simply, because the democrats have lost their minds.

Not because I am a trump fan but because today's (left) democrats have made me like and trust them far less.

Fair enough and I understand the point you are making. I understand that part of what allowed Trump to win the presidency was serial and systemic failings of democrats. I do not deny that. I also understand why for you calls to 'defund police departments' is not an attractive campaign objective likely to solicit your vote. I get all that.

What I am saying is that if we want a better society we have to get better at identifying the things that we think are wrong. This tendency to identify things that are wrong with the 'other side' whilst ignoring exactly the same 'wrong thing' from our own side , even when the degree of it is demonstrably worse, is no route to any progress and is part of the problem. What is more it is part of the problem that each of us has direct personal and totaly control over as far as our own behaviour goes. That is the point I am trying to make.

[Londonrake]

I love the term "Liberals". It must be the greatest misnomer ever. I've experienced 4 years of "Liberal" posts on Brexit. They're the most intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like people you could (not) wish to meet.

Your problem here is that of lack of clarity of thought. Because some who had a different view to you on Brexit were "intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like people" you make a false correlation between not supporting Brexit and these traits. Yet you must know that there were those who supported Brexit who were also "intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like people" just as there were those who did not who were not "intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like people". What you should be identifying as 'bad' is behaviour that is "intolerant, spiteful. vitriolic, fascist-like" and condemning it regardless of it comes from brexit supporters or not, from the left or the right.

It is the same with the protesters. There were protesters in London gathered under the banner of 'protecting statues and monuments'. Some were good decent people, WW2 veterans. Some were right wing fascist hooligan thugs one of which literary pissed on a monument. Using your 'system' above it would be easy to tar all the 'protect our statues' counter protesters as 'right wing fascist hooligan thugs' because that suits a particular political agenda and narrative. Which is exactly what you do when you and people like Maximus tar all those protesting against excessive police brutality and excessive police brutality targeted based on ethnicity as 'fascists pretending to be anti fascists'.

Either identify the commonality that is wrong and apply it equally to all groups, those that you are supportive of personally and those you are not or be seen for what you are, someone who just complains about something when it is done by those you are not aligned with and ignores it when done by those you are aligned with. IE someone driven by partisanship and little else.

On the whole yes.

However, ........................(and I've no wish to go back to a long discussion about the merits or not of Brexit here) immediately after the referendum my view was that following a 6 month long, sometimes bitter, campaign and record numbers of voters turning out the matter had been resolved. I felt a modicum of sympathy for those who had so closely lost. That soon evaporated. There was an immediate and sustained outpouring of vitriol at those who'd voted to leave by people who were, laughingly, declaring themselves to be both Liberals and Democrats. I won't list the things we were called here - it would take up too much space. IIRC even Tim spoke in apocalyptic terms about his world being destroyed by the "red necks". That though a pretty tame example.

I think that most would concede had the result been reversed it would have been the end of the matter. "Democracy" winning out and all.

You'll be well aware of the following 4 year's events. Every trick in the book was explored to overturn that result. Even when 85% of the electorate voted for the main parties in the 2017 general election, both of whom promising to "respect the outcome of the referendum," Labour subsequently bringing new meaning to the term "fudge". In May 2019's EU parliamentary elections the UK returned 26 new members from the Brexit party. An organisation which had only existed for a matter of weeks. IIRC they became the largest single group at Strasbourg. Despite all of those clear pointers of national feeling there was an ongoing betrayal at Westminster, from the so-called "neutral" Speaker down. I pointed out consistently that ultimately there would be a day of reckoning and of course it finally came last December. Most of the principle Judas MPS being kicked out of parliament, Labour, recording it's worst defeat in almost a century and the Tories, on a "Get Brexit done" ticket their best win in 30 years. Bercow, like Corbyn, consigned to the obscurity so richly deserved. The LibDems, who were committed to simply binning the referendum result ( "Lib"? "Dem"? ) were trounced. Their head of the school debating society leader losing her seat.

So, no. I am not making any "false correlations". Remainers from day one began what was basically a civil war. Notably on Social Media where, and this was Lordo's big mistake, because of the remainer cacophony a lot of people convinced themselves it was a reflection of national reality. Petulant bad losers, stamping their feet and acting out " I'll squeam and squeam til' I'm sick!!" . Even since last December people like Blair and Hesletine, fronting "The European Movement", have been shuttling back and forth between London and Brussels in order to do their best to force a transition extension. The motive for which is crystal clear. Now the game seems up Barnier might perhaps actually get around to taking HMG, rather than the disparate UK opposition elements, a bit more seriously.

Apart from that............................. I have no strong feelings on the matter.

The recent disgraceful behaviour in the UK, initiated by the ridiculously named BLM (it seems clear to me that to them they actually don't) had a clear outcome. Whether or not the vast majority of protesters were peacefully gathered in their thousands - shoulder to shoulder - on the cusp of a viral pandemic is irrelevant. The media will always focus on the minority vandalism elements. Pictures of the police being "given a good thrashing" and police horses having objects thrown at them will always fill the screens. The idea that national monuments should be defaced - by any side - is I submit an affront to the vast majority of people. That statues should be destroyed by mobs, in the service of some Orwellian political agenda, equally repugnant.

Look on the bright side. Soon, if there's a correlated surge in UK Covid deaths your view of the lockdown's desirability should be further vindicated.

[Kikapu]

Who would in their right mind vote for Trump again unless they hate the US constitution and love fascism instead, just as Trump does.

Reading all the posts responding to the above question, I did not hear anyone stating that they love and support the US constitution, because if they had, there's no way anyone could vote or support Trump again as he has constantly violated the US constitution which he swore to protect during his inauguration. Therefore, when the Trump supporters who wave the American flag to demonstrate their patriotism, it is nothing more that pure bullshit. By definition, they are in fact anti-America and what the constitution stands for. When Trump violates the freedom of the press, violates freedom of peaceful assembly with violence, separations of State and Church with his photo op, then he can only be viewed as a fascist, which some of his generals have openly spoken against him. There's yet hope for America once Trump is gone!

Screen shot 2020-06-14 at 10.35.35.png

[Londonrake]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izk3Q5YepCo

.

[erolz66]

I think that most would concede had the result been reversed it would have been the end of the matter. "Democracy" winning out and all.

Can you concede that what 'remaining in the EU' meant was clear and defined and meant overwhelmingly the same thing to everyone however they voted in a way that 'leaving' was not ?

Every trick in the book was explored to overturn that result.

We have been over this a hundred times. The vote that we should leave was clear and definitive. How we should leave was not even amongst those that supported leave. All I ever argued was just as the decision to if we should leave should be democratically valid so to should the decision as to how we leave. For every remainer that sought to use every trick in tyhe book to over turn the result of the referendum there was a leaver who was determined to try and use every trick in the book to get their preferred way of leaving without democratic validity to it.

So, no. I am not making any "false correlations". Remainers from day one began what was basically a civil war.

This is just nonsense. There were those who supported remaining in the EU who made their case calmly and without spite and without vitriol just as there were those that supported leave with vitriol and with spite. That is the simple truth you deny as far as I am concerned. You position as far as I understand it is little more than anyone who agrees with me is a good person however they behave and anyone who disagrees with me is a bad one however they behave and is plainly self serving bollocks when put in those terms.

The recent disgraceful behaviour in the UK,...

So is your issue with those who behave disgracefully regardless of their political beliefs or is it with those who protest legally and peacefully for a cause you do not have sympathy for ? I ask because to me it seems that the latter is well within the realms of possibility given how you have expressed your views here to date.

Look on the bright side. Soon, if there's a correlated surge in UK Covid deaths your view of the lockdown's desirability should be further vindicated.

I have said over and over and over I do not know if lockdown measure will turn out to be net negative or neg positive in the long run and nor do I think anyone else can know this with certainty yet. This is what I have said plainly over and over again. Yet you characterise my view as being someone who believes lockdown is desirable. So what is really going on here Londonrake ? How can it be that I say one thing, over and over again and yet you characterise my view as being something entirely different to what I have actually said ?

For the record what I have said can be know already is

1. The scale of this event in England and Wales is greater than the scale seen in regular flu spikes seen every 5-10 years or so and similar in scale to events seen every 50 - 100 years. I say this because that is what the hard definitive numbers show.

2. There is a overriding correlation with how early a given government acted and how good or bad outcomes to date have been. This is independent as to what specific actions they took, be they lock down or not lock down. Those countries that acted earlier with lock downs or without but other measures have to date had better outcomes than those that acted later. I say this because the evidence for it is clear and plain.

What I have NEVER said is that it is clear that lock down will end up have a net positive benefit.

[Paphitis]

Who would in their right mind vote for Trump again unless they hate the US constitution and love fascism instead, just as Trump does.

Reading all the posts responding to the above question, I did not hear anyone stating that they love and support the US constitution, because if they had, there's no way anyone could vote or support Trump again as he has constantly violated the US constitution which he swore to protect during his inauguration. Therefore, when the Trump supporters who wave the American flag to demonstrate their patriotism, it is nothing more that pure bullshit. By definition, they are in fact anti-America and what the constitution stands for. When Trump violates the freedom of the press, violates freedom of peaceful assembly with violence, separations of State and Church with his photo op, then he can only be viewed as a fascist, which some of his generals have openly spoken against him. There's yet hope for America once Trump is gone!

Screen shot 2020-06-14 at 10.35.35.png

I love and support the US Constitution. In my opinion, it's the best constitution in the world.

I also support Trump however, i am not a US Citizen. So that's matter of for the American people who also support the US Constitution.

You are creating a massive straw man. But that seems to be the tactic of the anti Trump forces, much like it was for the remainers during the long 4 years of BREXIT hell and which was so well described in LR's post above.

Trump has done none of that. The demonstrations were violent from the very beginning. people in the US have the right to demonstrate all they like, but assaulting police, throwing rocks at them, and burning cars and shops is illegal. There is no provision in the US Constitution to allow any of that.

So yes, the police have every right to arrest any protester who breaks the law.

[erolz66]

The demonstrations were violent from the very beginning. people in the US have the right to demonstrate all they like, but assaulting police, throwing rocks at them, and burning cars and shops is illegal. There is no provision in the US Constitution to allow any of that.

There is no credible evidence that I am aware off that the protesters that were cleared from Lafayette Square in order to allow Trump to walk to the church for a photo op assaulted police, threw rocks at them or were burning cars or shops. There is much credible evidence that their constitutional rights to legal protest were violated under order from Barr, the attorney general and solely for the benefit of Trump political campaigning requirements. This is real and serious stuff and that you just ignore it to me undermines your claims to respect the US constitution above and beyond your own political bias. This stuff is real, it happened and it is not some fiction made up by a left wing press out to try and subvert democracy. We will see in due course if the rule of law stands in Trump's America or if in fact Trump's officials like Barr are able to act with impunity against the very constitutional rights they have sworn to uphold.

[cyprusgrump]

I have said over and over and over I do not know if lockdown measure will turn out to be net negative or neg positive in the long run and nor do I think anyone else can know this with certainty yet.

Isn't it bizarre then that every post and every link you post here supports your (obvious) view that Lockdown is appropriate...

Your frequent negative posts about Sweden being just one example...

Have you realised that you have fucked-up bigly and are attempting to row back from your original position...?