Corbynomics: A Dystopia

Thrugelmir

GreatApe wrote: »

Not because Qatar has the best governance or freedom or human values but because they have one hell of a gas field and a small population to share it out among

Doesn't mean that everybody who works in Qatar is treated fairly. There's no minimum wage or employment protection law.

antrobus

Boredatwrork wrote: »

Can you confirm it was sexual assault? ...

S3 Sexual Offences Act 2003

Sexual assault

(1)A person
(A) commits an offence if—
(a)he intentionally touches another person

(B),
(b)the touching is sexual,
(c)B does not consent to the touching, and
(d)A does not reasonably believe that B consents

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/3



So, technically, yes.

Of course the touchee would have to complain to plod, the CPS would have to conclude that it was worthwhile taking it to court, and the jury would have to stop laughing long enough in order to deliver a not guilty verdict.

I'd only note that it is strange that the act states "he intentionally touches".

antrobus

Boredatwrork wrote: »

..

Your character assination of a "tory type" is also pretty cringey, I guess however thats normal for "bigot types".

The whip has been withdrawn from a MP named Kelvin Hopkins, in respect of allegations that he "he sent “inappropriate” text messages and rubbed himself up against a young woman after a political event."

Oh, hang on. He's Labour. Scrub that one.

Boredatwrork wrote: »

..
Can I ask in that Brain of yours, do you consider your slander and stereotyping as progressive?

Of course it is. All weapons must be deployed in the furtherance of the cause.

Moby

Boredatwrork wrote: »

If you accuse me of A, I then say, no Its B and here's why, then next post you are back to accusing me of A, then of course I am going to come back with the same thing :rotfl:It shows you are either not listening, misunderstanding or being deliberately dishonest, surely?

I think that's how we see each other frankly.

I never claimed it to be that simple, of course life has challenges, but if you can stick to that general template for the vast vast majority, it really is all that it takes, and a lot more preferable to not actually trying, which appears to be what your promoting.

Simplistic nonsense...'vast majority' indeed. No point in me repeating all the equality of opportunity issues I raised...you are clearly not interested.

I also note for a third time you are unable to list all the personal changes you have made to ensure the quality of life for future generations is intact, considering its all you seem to be banging on about and accusing others of being selfish, I am a bit puzzled as to why you aren't chomping at the bit to list them.
However if all your life changing work boils down to is putting a tick on a ballot paper every four years and whining on a forum that other people aren't doing enough...well that says it all really.;)

Nothing I would say would satisfy you. So why would I feed the troll?

Moby

Boredatwrork wrote: »

Can you confirm it was sexual assault? I am not defending him, but as far as I know it was 'inappropriate behavior' and beyond touching Julia Hartley Brewers leg, which she is on record saying she hopes he didn't resign for that reason, there hasn't been any other public specific allegations. Like I said I am not defending him or what might get out, but that seems to be a bit of a tangent, and if we are turning it into a political football (how very compassionate of you), I'd be more worried about the alleged rape allegation from Bex Bailey at this stage.

Your character assination of a "tory type" is also pretty cringey, I guess however thats normal for "bigot types". Can I ask in that Brain of yours, do you consider your slander and stereotyping as progressive?

Read the papers today? It's not about one incident....It's about an abuse of power between the more powerful in society and the less powerful. As I said all parties have such types......the difference with the tories however is there pursuit of power is their prime objective. They don't allow values to get in their way. As for slander and stereotyping. I'm not going to give Fallon the benefit of the doubt. He was the tory enforcer who accused Corbyn and Miliband of being unpatriotic because they were socialists. He smeared Corbyn day after day and said nasty things about Milibands father. Good to see him get his come uppance. No it's not progressive but hey no one's perfect. I really particularly disliked Fallon because he was happiest doing the dirty smear stuff.

Boredatwrork

antrobus wrote: »

Of course it is. All weapons must be deployed in the furtherance of the cause.

It's a moral driven holy quest after all, so being bigoted, stereotyping and downright unpleasant while accusing others of such things is justifiable behavior I guess.

Moby

Boredatwrork wrote: »

It's a moral driven holy quest after all, so being bigoted, stereotyping and downright unpleasant while accusing others of such things is justifiable behavior I guess.

No it's about bringing those who have power over others to account for their actions. That's what unions are there for ...to defend workers in the workplace. The powerful use the law to protect their interests. Say....Michael Fallon and a young black male got arrested for exactly the same traffic offence....how confident are you that they would be treated equally before the law? Who do you think would be able to have access to the old boy network for a good lawyer for instance?
I take pleasure in the fall of the powerful because the system generally protects them. I'm not saying tories have more sex offenders because of anything genetic. I'm saying they are more culpable because they are better at hiding it and looking after their own. Do your own research. See how the establishment works in this country! Don't be naive! Look at how the tories have reduced legal aid and therefore access to the law. Look at how they have reduced the influence of the unions. Those acts increase the likelihood of victims; those acts further reduce the ability of the already disadvantaged to protect themselves!

Eric_the_half_a_bee

Moby wrote: »

I'm not saying tories have more sex offenders because of anything genetic. I'm saying they are more culpable because they are better at hiding it and looking after their own.

How do you reconcile your theory that the Tories "are better at hiding it" with the fact that a list of 36 Tory MPs and allegations against them is widely circulating in the public domain, with no comparable list for Labour?

Boredatwrork

Moby wrote: »

No it's about bringing those who have power over others to account for their actions. That's what unions are there for ...to defend workers in the workplace.

Well that, and pay Len Mclusky a six figure sum for basically doing work no more complicated than any random bloke in a call centre, and I would imgaine he gets a few free lunches along the way. Solidarity and all that.

Moby wrote: »

The powerful use the law to protect their interests.

Nothing more than a baseless sweeping accusation. The powerful, just like the poor influence both good and bad, is the poor mugger on the street any better than the million pound fraudster? because he is poor, what kind of salary does the murderer have to be on get a better deal?
This whole rich = bad, poor = good equation you are convinced off is B0ll0ck5 quite frankly, if it were true the world would be a very different place.
Of course judges and jurys vary, and of course they get it wrong, but thats up and down the scale, and the scrutiny put on public figures these days often puts many at an unfair disadvantage, of course it would have to be looked at by a case by case scenario to get a real estimate, on another note inst there a very large outcry for decades now about lenient sentences being given to people up and down the scale?

Moby wrote: »

Say....Michael Fallon and a young black male got arrested for exactly the same traffic offence....how confident are you that they would be treated equally before the law? Who do you think would be able to have access to the old boy network for a good lawyer for instance?

There's are plenty of rich powerful people who have been done for traffic offenses, and plenty of people who are not rich or powerful who have got off. Once again no real raw data, just your own cynical opinion, that you expect people to accept as fact.

Moby wrote: »

I take pleasure in the fall of the powerful because the system generally protects them.

So basically you admit you dislike a demographic and consider them more guilty, because you percieve the system is failing, regardless if the system failing or not, the fact that you consider people guilty before innocent is hardly the position you want to take "those (rich/powerful/white men/blacks/immigrants) must be up to no good..."

Moby wrote: »

I'm not saying tories have more sex offenders because of anything genetic. I'm saying they are more culpable because they are better at hiding it and looking after their own. Do your own research. See how the establishment works in this country! Don't be naive! Look at how the tories have reduced legal aid and therefore access to the law. Look at how they have reduced the influence of the unions. Those acts increase the likelihood of victims; those acts further reduce the ability of the already disadvantaged to protect themselves!

You are saying they must be more guilty, because they have a better chance of hiding it. nothing more nothing less. Would you consider that a rair and reasonable position if you were in the dock accused of something, on the evidence of because someone perceives you could get away with it. What a ridiculous position for christs sake, do you not see how misguided this logic is? How is this position any different to drowning witches?

antrobus

Eric_the_half_a_bee wrote: »

How do you reconcile your theory that the Tories "are better at hiding it" with the fact that a list of 36 Tory MPs and allegations against them is widely circulating in the public domain, with no comparable list for Labour?

Well, as regards Kelvin Hopkins, BBC Breakfast were saying that the complaint against him had been raised some time earlier, at which time he was reprimanded. At then promoted to the shadow cabinet.

Cover up, I say, cover up!