In itself BLM is clear and emphatic. Until recently, I'd say there could have been no confusion what the movement stands for. But now these other slogans do raise questions of whether that is still the case; from the outside looking in, you begin to wonder.
Keir Starmer Labour Leader
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
Sure. Anyone suggesting that there isn't the need for Police support in certain situations is plain wrong and creating some sort of Police light "community" function is not a good idea.
However, there is also the need to address the root cause of issues and minimise the frequency of the problems occurring and there's also lots of roles where the Police need support from specialists (placing a child into state custody for example).
I don't think that most people are suggesting that appropriate Police roles be filled by non Police. It's more that the Police are less likely to get dragged into all manner of shit that they don't need to be.
The Police need to be properly funded but so do social work and social care otherwise it's just a losing battle.
There are absolutely people who want to do these types of roles. These roles, though, should not be at the expense of Police funding.
The media’s silence on this issue is revealing.
Didn’t imply or say police are the only ones doing that kind of work. I work with these people all the time so I am fully aware they are around in numbers but as Im mainly talking about the incidents which garner all the headlines. The incidents that are volatile, unpredictable and confrontational in uncontrolled environments.
There’s a reason mental health staff call police to assist them when they’re doing assessments of people from their home. There is a reason LAS call police to assist them when someone with mental health is showing any sort of aggression. These people are not cut out or moulded for the confrontation and they don’t want it. They don’t push or advocate to be trained to deal with it because it is not something they are mentally and physically able to deal with. It is a very very difficult thing to deal with.
I can see we’re on more or less the same page. And yeah you’re quite right more needs to be done to take pressure off police in certain areas and it would allow them to do their job better. The stance you’ve taken is one that I accept and agree with 100%. If there was more people working in those areas, round the clock it would improve the overall situation tenfold.
But if you look at that article I initially quoted and a lot of the stuff behind some of BLM’s changes, the ideas and beliefs are actually quite different to what you just said. For one the defunding talk, then suggesting police shouldn’t even be called to domestic/mental health type incidents etc. Essentially suggesting a new ‘force’ be formed to deal with emergency incidents. That stuff is daft.
Dont follow you here - are saying that you agree there are lots of first responders out there other than the police but, what, none of them really want to do their jobs?
Are you being deliberately obtuse ?
I don’t really know how much clearer I can explain it
A lot of incidents involving people experiencing mental health episodes or drug induced breakdowns become fully confrontational.
I explained in the last post that this is why mental health staff and ambulance staff call police in these situations as opposed to dealing with it alone because they are not comfortable nor trained in dealing with confrontation, violence, aggression etc.
I did not say they don’t really want to do their jobs and you’re being quite naughty there suggesting that’s what I meant.
People do not become social workers with the expectancy of being repeatedly assaulted when they go to work or being constantly involved in confrontation.
In fantasy, social media world, mental health incidents, domestic violence arrests, drug and alcohol incidents are resolved by everyone shaking hands and walking off together smiling. In real actual life this happens less than half of the time.
Are you being deliberately obtuse ?
I don’t really know how much clearer I can explain it
A lot of incidents involving people experiencing mental health episodes or drug induced breakdowns become fully confrontational.
I explained in the last post that this is why mental health staff and ambulance staff call police in these situations as opposed to dealing with it alone because they are not comfortable nor trained in dealing with confrontation, violence, aggression etc.
I did not say they don’t really want to do their jobs and you’re being quite naughty there suggesting that’s what I meant.
People do not become social workers with the expectancy of being repeatedly assaulted when they go to work or being constantly involved in confrontation.
In fantasy, social media world, mental health incidents, domestic violence arrests, drug and alcohol incidents are resolved by everyone shaking hands and walking off together smiling. In real actual life this happens less than half of the time.
We're struggling to communicate here for some reason. My confusion is that, as I stated, there are lots of people doing this without the police already. I should know, I employ lots of them. They don't always work alongside the police, they don't even often work alongside the police, its rare for staff to call out the police to join them in an intervention. I'm not sure which bit of this you disagree with and why.
solid performance on LBC.straight forward answers .said he and his cabinet will take unconscious bias training a 3hr course apparently, I wonder if it is the equivalent of the speed awareness course .also thinks prince Andrew should face the American inquisitors.
Edit -
It was always about the teachers union
Last edited:
Presumably Sir Keir began today's visit with Ferrari by calling him out for this?
surely the ehrc will include this in their omniscient probe on labour's structural antisemitism
A good time to remind people that this tweet has existed for years without a peep from anyone.
Remember: anti-Semitism is fine so long as it’s against the left. Otherwise, it’s zero tolerance. This has been the political lodestar since 2015 and Starmer is merely perpetuating it.
That tweet is only anti-Semitic if you interpret it as an anti-Semite. It reads ideologically to me.
edit: I feel I should clarify I don’t mean to accuse you of being an anti-Semite
As a matter of interest, do you know what it was that Steve Reed tweeted?
Just to check - anyone ever using the phrase "puppet master", then hurriedly deleting the tweet and apologising when it's pointed out, is a definite anti-semite
Someone implying that Israel were involved in the death of George Floyd, then refusing to apologise or remove it when called out, is totally fine.
Someone implying that Israel were involved in the death of George Floyd, then refusing to apologise or remove it when called out, is totally fine.
I was wondering what the spin around this news story would be. I'd try again though as it's a bit rubbish
Desmond is jewish.
Amazing or actually quite sad how the RLB story has already been memory holed.
No one is calling Reed an anti-Semite. No one is saying RLB did nothing wrong. We are saying both are guilty of carelessness in issues of anti-Semitism and both should be treated the same. RLB also explicitly said she agreed with the office a line of apology but was then told actually she was being sacked anyway.
That tweet is most definitely engaging in an anti-Semitic trope whether intended or not. Campbell has previous there too but gets a free pass as he’s anti-left. In this case it may well be clumsily phrased as with Reed’s, but it’s the response to these misdemeanours versus others that is the issue at hand here.
Also his unconscious bias answer was shite as well
I knew Starmer would be rubbish on actual left policy but I didn't expect him to be pretty awful at pretending to be a standard liberal.
I knew Starmer would be rubbish on actual left policy but I didn't expect him to be pretty awful at pretending to be a standard liberal.
I don't really care as much as you all seem to, but the outrage all feels a bit "He said Jehovah!" to me.
The only thing I'm outraged by is Keir "0 tolerance" Starmer. What an almighty joke he is.
Really? What a surprise.
yeah just like wrong dailys tweet would have fallen outside of the scope as well
It's a silly party that should be abandoned. Sadly there are years until the next election but the one good thing that means is there is no need to think the Labour party is important any more.
I mean, it's just a joke at the moment. It's losing its BAME support rapidly, it's quite intentionally losing its left wing support. It's a party that thinks opinion polls matter when no one can fecking vote for a year cause of the pandemic. They genuinely think that winning over a few white people in 2020 is a strategy. It's absolutely embarrassing for those who remain involved.
The Greens are better, so is the SNP and Plaid. There are of course also other ways of changing politics that do not involve political parties. They are probably the best bet. Protest generally achieves more than electoralism.
At this point I think anyone who thinks Keir Starmer is going to achieve anything worthwhile is incredibly optimistic and either clueless or remarkably relaxed about his white supremacist instincts.
The Greens are better, so is the SNP and Plaid. There are of course also other ways of changing politics that do not involve political parties. They are probably the best bet. Protest generally achieves more than electoralism.
At this point I think anyone who thinks Keir Starmer is going to achieve anything worthwhile is incredibly optimistic and either clueless or remarkably relaxed about his white supremacist instincts.
Quite telling and indicative of the farcical leadership that already a Labour MP has deemed it best to delete a tweet endorsing Starmer’s ‘zero tolerance’ approach
Bit of an aside but i really feel like MPs shouldn't be allowed to delete tweets made under their official accounts, certainly not without an audit process. Tweets are public record and deleting them feels very underhand.
He's a horrible little cretin who's almost as much of a populist as Boris. He's the text book definition of an untrustworthy politician.
Certainly but importantly he's also a moron with terrible advisers.
It's annoying because I was trying to remain optimistic over his appointment but all he's really achieved is alienating half of his voters. He's a spineless little shit bag who is clearly sucking up to all kinds of private interests. My primary concern is that the media will back him and get him into power which will entirely kill the left of Labour for a generation.
He has already done better than Corbyn by uniting Labour with Nigel Farage.
And he's got Clarkson's support. Which surely will not evaporate as any election nears.
Almost forgot about that. Can't wait for Nick Griffin's endorsement.
He actually praised Corbyn, I think. He was trolling regarding the antisemitism debate.
Egg, meet face.
I know people are going mad over this but surely the key to winning is to have people who would have voted for your opponent turn to you instead ?
Otherwise how do you ever win ?
Yes, but you do that by making a compelling argument on your own terms. Not cravenly deciding that, actually, this anti-racism is a tough sell after all...I know, let's court the support of notorious bigots like Clarkson by pandering to their prejudices. From a point of principle it is unforgivable for Labour and from a strategic perspective I'm yet to see the analysis of results this decade which suggest Labour's route to power depends on attracting bigots like Clarkson; it's also a pretty fair assumption to state that if Labour is swinging the pendulum far enough to win people like Clarkson, it's going to be at the cost of a substantial amount of traditional supporters too.
2016 Referendum and Johnsons popularity at the 2019 GE suggest there is probably enough Clarkson-esque bigotry out there to make it a worthwhile venture to blur pricinples away from the Corbyn yardstick. To be fair to the guy, he's been lambasted (by said bigots) for saying on air he'll be undertaking unconscious bias training, on the back of "that" BLM comment.