Atw@er surely.Or is it double t?

I think some people forget that Trump is the president of the united states because his opponent was Hilary Clinton and not because there are huge numbers of people cheering when he slags off 'insert opponent'.

A lot of people don't regard it as importantly as some of our more sensitive and reactionary PC friends but it's wrong to think that they are impressed with it either.

I find some of what Trump does is different and it mostly annoys those I find annoying.....he mostly says what he likes and insults those he doesn't like. Do I think that's what a president should be doing?.....no I don't. I've criticised it myself. Do I turn over at night worrying about it...no.

How Trump regards the presidency is transitory. In a maximum of seven more years you will have some other berk to worry about.....or if the democrats can get their act together perhaps at the next election.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I agree with much of what you say here, though I don't see Trump quite as badly as you do.

I'm a nationalist with a small 'n' so I'm obviously going to agree with him on those aspects but other than that I'm just not a republican.....In American terms, I'm probably more an old school Democrat.....mind you a previous version of Trump was too....just an arseh also.

I'm very much for a society that promotes civility but doesn't enforce it.....allowing for offence and humour and new perspectives to emerge.....Indeed this is how the current 'progressive' ideas were allowed to emerge and take their positions in the first place.....I'm very suspicious of this new 'hate speech' initiative to censor non violent opinions.

So Trump deserves the criticism he gets for his childish twitter stuff......but he has every right to do it....people vote from the options they get and if Sanders had been the democratic ticket they might have him......Better or worse for their economy....I couldn't honestly say.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I said I'm a nationalist I didn't say I'm a racist.

I know that for many on the left this is a mutually exclusive statement. However, how ideologies and its adherents categorise others is for them.

What I am is ethnocentric but your skin colour being different to me isn't important. In reality I think that many people who get called racist actually fall into this area with the actual number of real racists being small....but that's just an impression, it's a subjective area....for many on the left race is everywhere and in everything.

To make a point about how being ethnocentric is different from being racist lets take some boxing examples like Frank Bruno or Chris Eubank Srn. These are black guys raised by foreign parents who are very English/British culturally. They are the very opposite of multiculturalism and shows how integration can actually work properly with good people and positive intent.

Being English is partly about taking influences and heritages that you might have and attaching your allegiance to the culture and land of England. Of the two the culture is much more important as a nation lies within its people and not its dirt. It's very opposite and in opposition to the 'citizen of anywhere' mentality. A culture that I view as very dangerous to the survival of secularism itself in the world of competing nations without this burden.

The term British has become problematic.....For some people it's an intellectual talisman for not being English even when they were raised here. The room multiculturalism gave for not integrating.

As for the actual 'race realists' or for the hate lot, 'white supremacists' that are out there. I think they are just mistaken to think there is some battle to fight on that level. We are living in a time where there are more white people alive than at any time in history.

However, the fight that I do believe is correct to engage in is the battle of ideas on culture both secular and national.

I agree that it's currently a counter culture because progressivism is in power both on the left and the right and is spread into all our institutions both private and public.

Having established itself it now seeks to wipe out opposition by introducing 'hate speech' which is reality is 'wrong think'. So increasingly you lose your job and your speech unless you sign up to their conventions......first it's just for terrorists and then it's for 'hate speech' and the bounds for what is acceptable become more narrow.

I know that on my side I will have those whose opinions I disagree with. However, I defend their right to hold them just as long as they aren't a physical threat to me. If you want to think I'm a w***er.....then I will probably think you're also a w***er....but I'd rather you had the freedom to think it and say it rather than punish you for saying it.

I believe in the marketplace of ideas with only the exception that the state is the only justified user of violence as it has a mandate. But unless you are hitting others or stealing from them the state should look to protect social freedoms.

Edited by Stirlingsays (15 Dec 2017 8.25am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I'm fairly sure that we had a statue of her in England long before Disney ever told her story, incorrectly.

Optimistic as ever

I was thinking of Gravesend, where she died.

Optimistic as ever

[Link]

Nowt to do with her.

Optimistic as ever

True, but is it actually because of their utterances, for their failure to live up to the contract they have with their employer. Usually its the latter.

And in some cases, most I'd say, that its wrong that happened (the exception being where there is a direct conflict between an individuals views and their position of authority - You can't have prison guards who are actively racist etc).

The Pocahontas thing is just stupid, yeah its a bit racially insensitive, but its more stupid than actually racist. I find it odd that people are more worried about things like that, with Trump, than say his tax cuts and abandonment of his election health care pledges.

That frustrates me too, its like attacking the BNP on question time for their racial views, rather than actually destroying them by talking about how they intend to fund half the s**t in their manifesto. Of course they're racist, they're an offshoot from the National Front - Get them on the economics and you'll destroy them.

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

This is more of a pincher movement that people have walked into really, ushered in by both the left and right just to maintain control. There is no truly significant threat to our way of life, whether from 'the war on drugs' , or 'the war on terror' unless we let there be, no matter how much people panic themselves. Buying in to these ideas wholesale just does their work for them and allows politicians to use these fears to bring in laws that will impact your life far more than any nutter ever will.

It was ideas and attitudes of the right that ushered in a miriad of terror laws, and helped to erode civil liberties. Of course many were fine with that because they basically saw it as something that would only hinder the lives of muslims, and didn't appreciate that anything brought in to target one group will inevitable end of being applied to everyone else. And so whether from the right and online censorship is brought in or 'protect our children', or encryption is obliterated to 'stop terror' or on the left when people are getting hauled in for something racist on twitter, it's all part of the same thing, and helps no-one and protects no-one because all of these things are inevitably used against the people more than any genuine threat. People on the left cheer half of these restrictions, people on the right cheer the other half, and they all merrily march off a cliff together.

Edited by wordup (15 Dec 2017 5.37pm)