You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Scum
April 25 2024 2.06am

Scum

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 6 of 10 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

 

jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 06 Oct 15 1.37pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.

There is nothing wrong with having wealth or being better off, and then maybe wanting to see that extended to others. Especially if you're actively trying to change something (no matter how stupid).

Do you suddenly have to give up on the plight of the poor if you're not actually in poverty? Or does having wealth mean you can actually do more about it.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View npn's Profile npn Flag Crowborough 06 Oct 15 1.43pm Send a Private Message to npn Add npn as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.37pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.

There is nothing wrong with having wealth or being better off, and then maybe wanting to see that extended to others. Especially if you're actively trying to change something (no matter how stupid).

Do you suddenly have to give up on the plight of the poor if you're not actually in poverty? Or does having wealth mean you can actually do more about it.



Yeah, cos a couple of beardy weirdies selling cereal is really impacting the poor!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stuk's Profile Stuk Flag Top half 06 Oct 15 2.05pm Send a Private Message to Stuk Add Stuk as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.37pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.

There is nothing wrong with having wealth or being better off, and then maybe wanting to see that extended to others. Especially if you're actively trying to change something (no matter how stupid).

Do you suddenly have to give up on the plight of the poor if you're not actually in poverty? Or does having wealth mean you can actually do more about it.



Just not those independent business owners? They're not allowed to make themselves better off, no?

 


Optimistic as ever

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 06 Oct 15 2.06pm

Quote npn at 06 Oct 2015 1.43pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.37pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.

There is nothing wrong with having wealth or being better off, and then maybe wanting to see that extended to others. Especially if you're actively trying to change something (no matter how stupid).

Do you suddenly have to give up on the plight of the poor if you're not actually in poverty? Or does having wealth mean you can actually do more about it.



Yeah, cos a couple of beardy weirdies selling cereal is really impacting the poor!

Why should having a nice home, prevent you from being concerned about the homes of others. Did he knock down the housing in question or evict the people living there? Its a misdirection, point at the 'rich hypocrite' the politics of right wing envy, a hate of those who've done well for themselves (even if they're a hipster c**t) and not forgotten about others worse off.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 06 Oct 15 2.09pm

Quote Stuk at 06 Oct 2015 2.05pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.37pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.

There is nothing wrong with having wealth or being better off, and then maybe wanting to see that extended to others. Especially if you're actively trying to change something (no matter how stupid).

Do you suddenly have to give up on the plight of the poor if you're not actually in poverty? Or does having wealth mean you can actually do more about it.



Just not those independent business owners? They're not allowed to make themselves better off, no?

Am I reading a different headline (I can't be doing with reading the daily mail it just annoys me). The criticism seems to be he lives in a nice house, that was once a block of council flats, and that's somehow his fault?


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View npn's Profile npn Flag Crowborough 06 Oct 15 2.12pm Send a Private Message to npn Add npn as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 2.06pm

Quote npn at 06 Oct 2015 1.43pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.37pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.

There is nothing wrong with having wealth or being better off, and then maybe wanting to see that extended to others. Especially if you're actively trying to change something (no matter how stupid).

Do you suddenly have to give up on the plight of the poor if you're not actually in poverty? Or does having wealth mean you can actually do more about it.



Yeah, cos a couple of beardy weirdies selling cereal is really impacting the poor!

Why should having a nice home, prevent you from being concerned about the homes of others. Did he knock down the housing in question or evict the people living there? Its a misdirection, point at the 'rich hypocrite' the politics of right wing envy, a hate of those who've done well for themselves (even if they're a hipster c**t) and not forgotten about others worse off.



In what way does hounding legitimate owners of a legitimate business show he is "concerned about the homes of others"? Particularly given he doesn't even live in the area?

Sounds more like "look, I know Brick Lane is an absolute dump (albeit with a couple of good curry houses in among a lot of crap ones), but I want it to stay an absolute dump, though I have no desire to actually live there myself, thanks all the same, because it's a dump".

It's almost like habitat preservation - they can hire David Attenborough to go to brick lane and make a Planet Earth episode focusing on the poor in their natural habitat.

I don't give a monkeys, personally, where he lives, he's just a 24 carat d1ckhead!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stuk's Profile Stuk Flag Top half 06 Oct 15 2.18pm Send a Private Message to Stuk Add Stuk as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 2.09pm

Quote Stuk at 06 Oct 2015 2.05pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.37pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.

There is nothing wrong with having wealth or being better off, and then maybe wanting to see that extended to others. Especially if you're actively trying to change something (no matter how stupid).

Do you suddenly have to give up on the plight of the poor if you're not actually in poverty? Or does having wealth mean you can actually do more about it.



Just not those independent business owners? They're not allowed to make themselves better off, no?

Am I reading a different headline (I can't be doing with reading the daily mail it just annoys me). The criticism seems to be he lives in a nice house, that was once a block of council flats, and that's somehow his fault?



Not from me it isn't. My criticism of him/them is that they're vandals and thugs attacking a perfectly innocent business.

It is a bit of a joke to protest against gentrification, when you're doing it yourself. Which he is.

 


Optimistic as ever

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View johnfirewall's Profile johnfirewall Flag 06 Oct 15 7.14pm Send a Private Message to johnfirewall Add johnfirewall as a friend

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.


Pathetic. But then all Socialists oppose gentrification, not just anarchists. The same ones who move to these trendy areas, paying 15 quid to get in to a previously working class establishment such as a snooker hall, and wonder why it drives demand for a Foxtons and Waitrose

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
leggedstruggle Flag Croydon 06 Oct 15 7.21pm

Indicative of the hypocritical nutters who are the New Left.

 


mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 07 Oct 15 1.16pm

Quote johnfirewall at 06 Oct 2015 7.14pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.


Pathetic. But then all Socialists oppose gentrification, not just anarchists. The same ones who move to these trendy areas, paying 15 quid to get in to a previously working class establishment such as a snooker hall, and wonder why it drives demand for a Foxtons and Waitrose

I don't. Reading was a f**king s**thole in the 70s and 80s, the gentrification of the 90s turned it around if you ask me. I'd like to see more done to turn s**ty estates and run down areas into nicer places to live, ideally driven by the local community, Council and business rather than corporate entities.

The only problem of gentrification is that it raises already ridiculous property prices, and squeezes people out. I'm not even sure what a 'traditional working class establishment' actually is anymore. The trade union club?

That said, who the f**k is going to Cereal bars? Sometimes I think I woke up and the world dropped acid while I was asleep.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 07 Oct 15 1.28pm

Quote Stuk at 06 Oct 2015 2.18pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 2.09pm

Quote Stuk at 06 Oct 2015 2.05pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 06 Oct 2015 1.37pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.

There is nothing wrong with having wealth or being better off, and then maybe wanting to see that extended to others. Especially if you're actively trying to change something (no matter how stupid).

Do you suddenly have to give up on the plight of the poor if you're not actually in poverty? Or does having wealth mean you can actually do more about it.



Just not those independent business owners? They're not allowed to make themselves better off, no?

Am I reading a different headline (I can't be doing with reading the daily mail it just annoys me). The criticism seems to be he lives in a nice house, that was once a block of council flats, and that's somehow his fault?



Not from me it isn't. My criticism of him/them is that they're vandals and thugs attacking a perfectly innocent business.

It is a bit of a joke to protest against gentrification, when you're doing it yourself. Which he is.

Right, woops, sorry I read the whole article. Yes, totally absurd for an anarchist group to target small individual businesses in an area, even if they're ridiculous absurd. I thought class war had folded but they're back again.

Class war were 'anarchists' that missed a very core concept of anarchism, that everyone has to be free to be who they wanted for an anarchist society to even remotely be plausible; their assumption really was that you could push society into being 'just like them' - which essentially meant oppression of any dissent.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View johnfirewall's Profile johnfirewall Flag 07 Oct 15 7.48pm Send a Private Message to johnfirewall Add johnfirewall as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 07 Oct 2015 1.16pm

Quote johnfirewall at 06 Oct 2015 7.14pm

Quote Jimenez at 06 Oct 2015 1.24pm

[Link]

This is the part I hate about them, probably more than anything else.


Pathetic. But then all Socialists oppose gentrification, not just anarchists. The same ones who move to these trendy areas, paying 15 quid to get in to a previously working class establishment such as a snooker hall, and wonder why it drives demand for a Foxtons and Waitrose

I don't. Reading was a f**king s**thole in the 70s and 80s, the gentrification of the 90s turned it around if you ask me. I'd like to see more done to turn s**ty estates and run down areas into nicer places to live, ideally driven by the local community, Council and business rather than corporate entities.

The only problem of gentrification is that it raises already ridiculous property prices, and squeezes people out. I'm not even sure what a 'traditional working class establishment' actually is anymore. The trade union club?

That said, who the f**k is going to Cereal bars? Sometimes I think I woke up and the world dropped acid while I was asleep.


You're different in having a grasp of reality.

Earning good money is considered acceptable only if it's from the state or if you spend it on nothing. A sensible campaign to expose hipsters would've involved inviting the local homeless to eat free cereal outside.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 6 of 10 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Scum