pink_triangle

Following the Trump years, I thought it was mainly a thing of the right, I’m starting to think right and left are as bad as each other in this respect.

The trouble is many people don’t want to analyse the facts and come to a conclusion. They want the conclusion first and then look for “facts” to fit. I am seeing so many people use terms like “evidence “, “genuine”, “ trusted source”. Funny thing is they are all things that support their preconceived views. Not seeing much I previously thought A, but have seen evidence B and now think C

I listened to an interesting podcast about people’s views on foreign affairs. Basically said that most people don’t really understand the issues, so take the lead from politicians they respect. What does slightly concern me is the feeling things are so polarised that when things like yesterday happen, i get the impression some are more focused on political point scoring than the dead people. I haven’t got a clue what happened and may never know, but it’s a dangerous road if we just look for “facts” that support our view of the world.

I can see how it could be Israel, could be Hamas on purposes, Hamas by accident or someone trying to frame either side. Conclusion I don’t have a clue, but it’s a really sh*t situation.

Unfortunately we are in an age where people will believe what they want to believe and if it’s something they don’t want to believe will just question its validity. Whatever’s happened it’s tragic to see more unnecessary deaths, hopefully some good can come of the tragedy and it starts off a move to peace. Unfortunately I can see it getting worse before it gets better.

While Biden is president and the likely successor also going to have a similar view, the war crime argument is off the table. We can only hope America are leading some kind of diplomacy behind doors which will save some lives. Unfortunately what Sunak or Starmer think (public or private) will have little influence in to how this plays out.

Wales have got England in 2 of the last 3 international tournament, it’s a duff draw and hope we never play them again! I hope that Scotland get through the group, seeing Wales beat Belgium is one of my favourite football moments and hope Scotland get a moment like that. I also hope you will join us Welsh and Irish fans in dismissing Southgate not wanting the hosts to get automatic qualification for euro 2028, as a Welsh fan we can’t be picky! On a connected note after years of seeing Wrexham get every duff Scottish player going, in Stephen Fletcher we finally have a good one!!

I have to admit I have taken to the nations league. I didn’t care when wales got promoted, nor did I care when we got relegated. To add to that it makes the play offs very contrived and hard to follow. Now to add to my dislike of the competition, I hear that Republic of Ireland are more likely to qualify for the euros if they lose their next game than win it. Surely this completely ruins the integrity of the game.

I think it’s not just (admittedly he is incredibly whiny)the anger, but the fact he can’t accept the views of anyone different to him. If your not Corbyn left your a stupid, racist person who doesn’t care about Palestinian kids dieing. Interestingly he used to do quite a few interesting interviews with people (centre left labour or torys) who disagreed with him. Now I watched his video from Tory conference and it’s pretty much just mocking Tory’s.

I don’t think so. As I said the likes of Bastani and Sarkar have pretty much the same perspective, but can deliver a more intellectual and articulate argument. I have always liked hearing from people I disagree with, feel it’s good to have your views challenged .

To me it’s not always what he says but the whiny way he says anything, he is just not a good debater. He just doesn’t seem a particularly deep thinker and just simplifies everything to his view of the world. Anyone who disagrees with him is a centrist, Starmer is a liar etc. As I say it’s all about clicks, likes and retweets and maybe he makes money this way. I get the impression he would be happy for labour to be pure and in opposition for ever. Probably fine for middle class socialists like himself.

Owen Jones accusing Starmer of racism, I thought he wanted a labour government? I have noticed since Corbyn his output has really deteriorated and he just looks like someone after likes and retweets. In comparison I think there is more interesting output from the likes of Bastani and Sarkar at Novara, even if you don’t always agree with them they can make a decent intellectual argument.

Unfortunately we are in a situation where there isn’t a good solution, just less terrible ones. Hopefully we are doing what we can to move the dial in the right direction.

I hold Starmer to much higher standards to Sunak and believe he will deliver on them. That’s why I will be voting labour in the next election. I think he cares more about health, education, poverty, housing and many other important things. However what people are asking Starmer to say (with most accepting he has no influence and can’t do anything) is something that splits the Labour Party, potentially loses an election , distances himself for potential allies and reduces his potential to influence if he does get power. This is political chess and Starmer has to think several moves ahead with anything he says. How will the public perceive it, how will the party perceive it, how will the media twist it, how will other foreign leaders act etc. If you want to be leader of the opposition forever you can’t always say what you want all the time.

I think sometimes we get the impression that those on the left are the “caring” ones and those on the right the “bad guys”. Through my job i have met some ukip supporters who do amazing charity work and some horrible left wing people so clearly things are more complicated. I note a tweet from one of the Novara people which she sensibly deleted. You wonder why people would put it out in the first place 'Today should be a day of celebration for supporters of democracy and human rights worldwide, as Gazans break out of their open-air prison and Hamas fighters cross into their colonisers' territory. The struggle for freedom is rarely bloodless and we shouldn't apologise for it.'

The call you would like him to make would split his own party, it would stir up the anti semetism stuff and link him with Jez, something the Tory’s would love him to do. As I said I’m completely fine costing votes (maybe an election) if it helps the situation, fact is it doesn’t save one life. If Starmer then navigates through an election, he has isolated all his allies (by taking an alternative view) and Israel doesn’t let him near the negotiating table. As Ukraine has shown people will take interest at first and then quickly turn a blind eye as other priorities take over. While I think your views on this come from the right place , I don’t think they fit the real world that a PM has to work in.

I think it’s great we live in a country where we can criticise the country and the opposition, not everyone is so lucky. The question goes back however if you’re criticising what he is saying, what should he say that can make a difference and not split the party, or adversely impact on their electoral chances? This is in the world as it is, not the one you would like it to be.

I imagine there are a host of things he supports that he won’t say in public because it makes political sense. That’s the pragmatism of power, if you are a protest party you can say everything you think and not care about the impact. Out of interest what would you advise Starmer to say that both was right, but wouldn’t adversely impact on party unity or electoral chances?

The question aren’t asked because the Tory’s are pretty united. It’s a bit of a wedge issue for labour which I think some are hoping to exploit.

I think they are two different discussions. However both exist in the world as it is, not the one you may like it to be. I want to see less people killing each other, I hold my hands up that I don’t know the solution to that. I have to hope that cleverer people than me can find a sticking plaster, because that’s more likely than a solution. Now Starmer can’t necessarily say what he wants, only he knows what he really thinks. I think the approach he is going to take is obvious and the one I would advise him to take. As I said his approach is one that works with the world as it is, not the one we may like it to be.

Who is supporting Israel? I wish neither side bombed each other. I’m supporting Starmer who I believe is taking the correct approach. If people want Starmer to scream about war crimes and solidarity with Palestinians fine, but it won’t save a single life, it will split the party and if Labour wins give them no negotiation power.

Do you really think Biden, Macron , Sunak etc are all going to be hauled to international court and thrown in jail? International law is by its nature still political. Hopefully this sh*t storm will be sorted through politics as it won’t through the law. My guess is Starmer/labour will pretty much follow the Sunak (and mainstream western leader) message. Politics is sometime about knowing which battles to fight and which you can win

The thing is we can say what we want and (admittedly making assumptions on your behalf ther definitely don’t on mine ) nobody gives a sh*t. Starmer lives in a world where what he says matters and sometimes he probably can’t say what he wants. Starmer wants to be PM of this country. In a way I admire him for that as it’s a job I wouldn’t want to do. It’s a job where you make tough decisions and get involved in this crazy geopolitical world where i wouldn’t know where to start. I don’t have a clue how to sort this mess, but in his position you can’t say I don’t have a clue and have to think not just about what you say, the short and long term impact and how it will be interpreted or twisted. I think your point about social media is an apt one. Starmer could come out with statements some on the left would like, could get likes and retweets. Instead he is playing the long game and taking the flack that comes with that. This shitstorm won’t be solved by statements on social media, i think Starmer gets that and is laser focused on winning the election and making things better

I want to see less people dieing from both sides . I am not pro or anti Israel or Palestine. I am just anti needless death. Unfortunately needless death has resulted in more needless death and that will continue. The question is how can we reduce (as we won’t stop ) these needless deaths and what measures can we put in the future to make them less likely. I think if Starmer/labour made the statement you would like him to make, it wouldn’t save a single life. I doubt most in the region even know who he is. It would however split the Labour Party and potentially impact on the next election. If I thought Starmer had the influence to save loads of lives then maybe that’s worth it. Unfortunately i don’t believe he has that influence. So we are left with the generic position Israel has a right to defend, but needs to stay within international law. We can only hope those who do have influence can sort this out.

I am sure in power they will be involved in diplomacy. However some people have this need to see everything on twitter, many of these talks will be done behind closed doors. As you say what labour say in public will make no difference if it’s the opposite to the USA.