Jump to content

littleyellowbirdie

Members
  • Content Count

    10,794
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

littleyellowbirdie last won the day on October 29 2023

littleyellowbirdie had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,870 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

8,408 profile views
  1. If anything, that reinforces why campaigning for her should make nothing of it.
  2. This guy is single-handedly responsible for building the tensions that created the EDL, yet somehow the people who will sound off about Yaxley-Lennon for the least of reasons, seem to want to discourage any conversation about an Islamist right at the heart of radicalising British Muslims against the UK into committing terrorist attacks. Very odd.
  3. Why? What does Anjem Choudhary have to do with Reform?
  4. Very interesting (and long) interview with Lammy on his thinking on foreign affairs. Especially interesting given it was aimed at an EU audience. https://geopolitique.eu/en/2024/05/06/the-lammy-doctrine-a-conversation-with-the-shadow-foreign-secretary/ Two choice paragraphs of interest: "There is also a strategic question for the EU here. What sort of partnership do you want with the biggest economy and the largest military power in Europe outside of the EU? My message is that a future Labour government would want to build a new geopolitical partnership between the UK and the EU, based on common interests and mutual trust. " "There is a broader issue here, I think. There is a certain strategic immaturity that sees Europe and Asia as strategically disconnected. This is something I always push back on. Look at the numbers. Last year South Korea exported more 155m shells to Ukraine than all European countries combined. Since September North Korea has sent over 6,700 munitions containers to Russia, the equivalent of over three million 152m shells. China, through dual use supplies, has according to our sources accelerated the Russian military’s reconstitution from 5-10 years to 1-2 years. The two are inextricably linked. At a time when the authoritarian powers in Eurasia — Iran, Russia, North Korea and China — are upping cooperation we should be upping cooperation with the Indo-Pacific democracies." This seems to be hinting towards my long held view that the UK is going to be encouraging the EU to get to the table with CPTPP and establishing a better trading relationship between us as part of that process.
  5. The Vietnam agreement was secured by Sunak. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-signs-new-agreement-with-vietnam-on-illegal-migration Good news about Europe starting to be more constructive now though.
  6. I would add that I'm very skeptical about the 'devolution' they've got planned that's mostly focussed on urban areas where Labour tend to do better. Funny that. It's round two of dividing up the country so that only Labour having complete control can get anything done, just like with Wales, Scotland, Manchester, London. Utterly corrupt behaviour.
  7. That's all very well to say, but Labour is doing this on the presumption that they can clear the asylum backlog. It'll be interesting to see how they get on with that. If they get it done by January that will be impressive. The Bibby Stockholm was a far cheaper alternative to hotels with nothing inherently wrong with taking the approach to housing. The Rwanda system as a deterrent was never actually tried; nobody can say it didn't work. Now that it has been abandoned with much money thrown down the drain as a result, Labour had better be confident that their way is going to work.
  8. What are they planning for housing them?
  9. I didn't notice that having much traction back then. It only seemed to really get more traction when Trump latched onto it. But the key thing is that it wasn't enough to stop him getting elected. This sort of thing just wasn't getting as much headway until the race baiters started getting really preachy and sanctimonious around 2015, which I firmly believe started alienating people and growing racial divides.
  10. I think he could be elected in the first place because there were enough people not bothered by his race. After his election, I think the somewhat preachy behaviour of some race baiters sent things backwards. I remember being appalled at an incredibly sanctimonious video by MTV in 2015 entitled 'dear white people', which was demonstrative of why things have gone backwards since Obama was elected. Edit: I just went to youtube to try and find it only to find there's now a whole Netflix show of the same title. What utter morons. But going back to Kamala Harris, I don't think there's anything to be gained by making her campaign about her ethnicity.
  11. So you think her race should be a deciding factor in the election then? I don't see anything more moral about voting for her because she's mixed race than voting against her because she's mixed race.
  12. It doesn't matter 'what's possible'; it's what actually happened that was the problem and caused the British people to reject freedom of movement. The fact remains that if we'd stayed in the EU the problem would have just carried on unaddressed, whereas now we have a government looking to fix the underlying problems that made freedom of movement uniquely damaging for the UK in a way that no government has done so far. You won't convince Britain that freedom of movement can work until a lot of other things have changed, not least some evidence that more Brits might be inclined to go elsewhere, especially older ones retiring abroad.
  13. They get it wrong in your opinion. You're basically stroppy about the Queen not sanctioning Boris Johnson for proroguing parliament, but if she'd have done that, it would have been a decision based purely on her opinion that would have outraged a large proportion of the population to no real benefit. It would have been cast as a partisan move. These sorts of powers are desirable for real emergencies like the sort of emergency you see in Egypt or Pakistan where governments are hiring thugs to beat up protesters, not for minor issues of procedural political gamesmanship.
  14. Absolutely right. That said, if the monarchy reaches a point where it no longer has a majority of public support for a sustained period then there'll have to be a negotiated settlement that sees the monarchy retired in a way that's acceptable to it, which will likely see a settlement where a fair proportion of the crown estate is returned to the monarch privately. From that point, the royal family will be a private family with no responsibility to the diplomatic services of the UK, but maintaining personal wealth and maintaining their global status as former monarchs the way other former royal families have done. In the meantime, the section of the crown estate that goes to the state will no doubt be sold off cheap like everything else. Republicanism in the UK is a triumph of narrow-minded idealism over pragmatic acceptance of something that isn't ideal, but works for the benefit of the UK with the consent of the majority of the population
  15. I enjoy watching you argue this. You're so obnoxious about it you're going to set republicanism back decades.
×
×
  • Create New...