Excellent contribution to the debate, Paul, despite some of the other panelists seemingly being completely unaware of the reality of how the country feels and why.
Far right ideology has not become mainstream but tolerance of a reasoned debate about the immigration concerns people have certainly has.
That, and the consistent failure of successive government's to do as they promised, are the real causes of the disillusionment and, hence, the demonstrations. Like you I absolutely condemn the violence and lawbreaking that has occurred.
Thank you for standing your ground Paul. Helyer made one good point, about how language is important, without getting the irony that the ones manipulating language and attempting to recast what is acceptable are the likes of himself. Their attempts to prevent reasonable discussion on a range of issues, one suspects because their arguments are weak, are a direct cause of the building resentment. Alongside, of course, our Political class who routinely lie to the public every 5 years to get elected. The country is visibly falling apart, largely from 40 years of centrist, globalist policies that have not been focussed on the citizens of this country. Labour are only going to make things a lot worse. I think the public knows that getting out of this hole is going to be hard and will take many years and come with costs. Trouble is, none of the politicians are on the same page as the public.
Paul that must have been tough especially with H.A Helyer and Liss. Helyer ( please stop initialising your name you are a nobody with a very thin academic record. You are mostly a shill for repressive Middle Eastern governments. . The Patronising H.A patronising pharisee that he is, would have had a totally indulgent attitude towards the Islamist vigilantes and their violence. The milquetoast hipster Liss with his annoying beard showed all the horrible disdain of the Metropolitan elite left for working people and I am just really surprised the term “underclass” didn’t come up. He almost creamed himself at Starmer’s hard line Stalinist approach. The guy from Leiden was a bit more thoughtful and I congratulate the anchor for at least trying to have an equal debate.
I can’t believe any of those 3 guys actually live in England - if they do then they are unbelievably out of touch with the majority of the population. I’m flabbergasted by their responses!
I wouldn’t bother debating with an American, few in the USA will be interested, and most of your supporters, I am one, are not interested in what the Americans think better to summarise your arguments for us to keep and use ourselves in writing.
That's my impression too, for most of them. A parallel universe dominated by cult thinking in which they have been indoctrinated. So they simply cannot understand people with different views, and demonise them, often projecting onto them their own serious moral failings. There will also be psychopaths who exploit the cult and its members. Critical Social Justice ideology (i.e. wokery/'identity politics') inculcates serious psychological failings in its believers, such as the paranoid interpretation of anything done by those in their demonised groups as indicating harmful intent against the preferred groups, and irrational guilt in the members of the demonised groups. There is conversely a complete inability or unwillingness to recognise the harms suffered by those in the demonised groups.
Indeed. There also seem to be close parallels between the characteristics of religious cults and political cults. To me, those characteristics, to some extent at least, reflect ancient tribalism and the need to fit into one's tribe, including thinking in the 'correct' way. In contrast it is so very important to learn the skills of logical, evidence based thinking, and be prepared to change one's assumptions and beliefs if the evidence requires that - whether one is thinking about political matters, or spiritual, or whatever.
Excellent contribution to the debate, Paul, despite some of the other panelists seemingly being completely unaware of the reality of how the country feels and why.
Far right ideology has not become mainstream but tolerance of a reasoned debate about the immigration concerns people have certainly has.
That, and the consistent failure of successive government's to do as they promised, are the real causes of the disillusionment and, hence, the demonstrations. Like you I absolutely condemn the violence and lawbreaking that has occurred.
Sorry, that should read "intolerance" not "tolerance" on line 6.
That chap Hellyer was dripping with condescension, while spouting the usual lazy, ill informed tropes one might expect from an out of touch academic.
Thank you for standing your ground Paul. Helyer made one good point, about how language is important, without getting the irony that the ones manipulating language and attempting to recast what is acceptable are the likes of himself. Their attempts to prevent reasonable discussion on a range of issues, one suspects because their arguments are weak, are a direct cause of the building resentment. Alongside, of course, our Political class who routinely lie to the public every 5 years to get elected. The country is visibly falling apart, largely from 40 years of centrist, globalist policies that have not been focussed on the citizens of this country. Labour are only going to make things a lot worse. I think the public knows that getting out of this hole is going to be hard and will take many years and come with costs. Trouble is, none of the politicians are on the same page as the public.
Paul that must have been tough especially with H.A Helyer and Liss. Helyer ( please stop initialising your name you are a nobody with a very thin academic record. You are mostly a shill for repressive Middle Eastern governments. . The Patronising H.A patronising pharisee that he is, would have had a totally indulgent attitude towards the Islamist vigilantes and their violence. The milquetoast hipster Liss with his annoying beard showed all the horrible disdain of the Metropolitan elite left for working people and I am just really surprised the term “underclass” didn’t come up. He almost creamed himself at Starmer’s hard line Stalinist approach. The guy from Leiden was a bit more thoughtful and I congratulate the anchor for at least trying to have an equal debate.
I can’t believe any of those 3 guys actually live in England - if they do then they are unbelievably out of touch with the majority of the population. I’m flabbergasted by their responses!
I wouldn’t bother debating with an American, few in the USA will be interested, and most of your supporters, I am one, are not interested in what the Americans think better to summarise your arguments for us to keep and use ourselves in writing.
That's my impression too, for most of them. A parallel universe dominated by cult thinking in which they have been indoctrinated. So they simply cannot understand people with different views, and demonise them, often projecting onto them their own serious moral failings. There will also be psychopaths who exploit the cult and its members. Critical Social Justice ideology (i.e. wokery/'identity politics') inculcates serious psychological failings in its believers, such as the paranoid interpretation of anything done by those in their demonised groups as indicating harmful intent against the preferred groups, and irrational guilt in the members of the demonised groups. There is conversely a complete inability or unwillingness to recognise the harms suffered by those in the demonised groups.
Indeed. There also seem to be close parallels between the characteristics of religious cults and political cults. To me, those characteristics, to some extent at least, reflect ancient tribalism and the need to fit into one's tribe, including thinking in the 'correct' way. In contrast it is so very important to learn the skills of logical, evidence based thinking, and be prepared to change one's assumptions and beliefs if the evidence requires that - whether one is thinking about political matters, or spiritual, or whatever.