4 ms·

Warning - far-right tabloid newspaper may not accurately depict events in order to raise the blood pressure of gammon-faced Little Englanders.

foldr 4y ago
I'm not a fan of the Telegraph, but it's actually the only remaining major broadsheet newspaper in the UK.
the_third_wave 4y ago
Warning - "far left" authoritarian commenters are wont to attack the source when they can not dispute the content. See how silly that looks? Don't agree with being labelled "far left" or "authoritarian"? Think this type of comment lowers the quality of the discourse? Refrain from this type of rhetoric and you'll be spared this type of retort.
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  I'm extremely far left, for which I make no apologies. You need to be aware that this is a newspaper originally founded in the 1930s by the Fascist Party, and fully supportive of Hitler and Mussolini. Edit: no it wasn't, this was the one founded in the mid-19th century, who were highly supportive of slaughtering natives in India, and then went on to be highly supportive of Hitler and Mussolini by the early 20th century. This is literally a newspaper for people who are happy to walk around outside with a Union Jack on their shirt and a swastika armband. Edit: This bit is still true.
  - the_third_wave 4y ago
    > This is literally a newspaper for people who are happy to walk around outside with a Union Jack on their shirt and a swastika armband. > I'm extremely far left, for which I make no apologies. Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Nicolae Ceaușescu, etcetera. All extremely far left, all guilty of heinous crimes against humanity. Do you support their policies, do you excuse their deeds because they were pursuing the ultimate goal of international socialism? Get a grip please, this is not Reddit. People walking around with a Union Jack on their shirt is fine by me, it is their national flag after all. People walking around with swastikas, hammers and sickles and other symbols of murderous ideologies is less so. How do you define your 'extremely far left' ideology? What makes it 'extremely far left'?
    - Gordonjcp 4y ago
      The union jack is ideologically identical to a swastika, at this point. Look at some of the far-right leaders - Margaret Thatcher, George Bush, Saddam Hussein, Ayatollah Khomeni, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mussolini, name omitted to avoid triggering Godwin, Boris Johnson, Tony Blair - all extremely far right, all guilty of heinous crimes against humanity. Do you stand with them?
      - the_third_wave 4y ago
        You did not answer my question on how you defined your 'far-left' ideology nor did you answer the 'yes/no' question I posed earlier. Have a go at it? As to me standing with the ragtag assembly of disparate leaders who you label as 'extremely far right' [1] I wonder why you ask since I do not label myself as 'far-right' nor as 'right'. Those labels are just silly since political thought is not 2-dimensional. I sometimes agree with the "right", sometimes with the "left" (as in "traditional left", not the modern identity-politics lunacy), in some ways I tend more towards anarchy, in other ways I deem there to be a need for more authority. [1] ...which is odd given that Hussein was the leader of the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party, Khomeini was pushed to power by leftists [2] some of whom continued to support him after it became clear he was intent on implementing a theocracy, Blair is a champagne socialist, Johnson a centrist populist, Pol Pot, Stalin and Hitler are various types of (inter)national socialists, Bush (which one? H.W or W?) a centre-right corporate puppet and Thatcher - finally someone who can be called 'right-wing' - just a straight right-winger. [2] https://marxismexplained.com/2020/11/27/iran-revolution-1979/ https://marxismexplained.com/2020/11/27/iran-revolution-1979...
twawaaay 4y ago
So is the news true or not? It should be pretty simple in this case, because if for the news to not be true it would mean they are not in fact rewriting Agatha Christie books at all? So which is it, do you have any knowledge? Or do you suggest to only read news from sources aligned politically with your views regardless of whether there is or isn't any true in the news? Anyway, in my opinion people who read the news and disregard facts that don't agree with their opinions is what I think is wrong with the world at the moment. Because of large number of these people, lying actually starts making sense, at least if you only care about getting elected. Because then what you say doesn't matter, the only thing that matters is whether you are able to exploit existing divisions to hijack voters by telling lies that agree with voters' emotions.
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  > So is the news true or not? As you well know, this is not a binary decision. > It should be pretty simple in this case Mmm. Should it? Agatha Christie stories have been rewritten a bit over the 100 years she has been published, most notably "Ten Little Indians", which was released in the US as "And Then There Were None", but was first published in 1939 with a different noun in the title which I will not provoke a response by using. I think they were still publishing it in the UK up until the 1970s under the original title! This article, however, is trying to froth up the beetroot-faced "pint of carling and a filthy joke" Union-jack-t-shirt-wearing segment over "political correctness gone mad". Bear in mind that this is the newspaper that was founded by Fascists for Fascists in the 1930s, and most recently had a headline on the front page saying we should be machine-gunning refugee boats to stop them landing in the UK.
  - foldr 4y ago
    I mostly agree with you, but both here and in your original comment you're confusing the Daily Telegraph with the Daily Mail. The Telegraph is a broadsheet, not a tabloid, and was founded in 1855, before Fascism was really a thing. It would help the credibility of what you were saying if you didn't keep making this basic mistake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Telegraph https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Telegraph

foldr 4y ago

I'm not a fan of the Telegraph, but it's actually the only remaining major broadsheet newspaper in the UK.

the_third_wave 4y ago

Warning - "far left" authoritarian commenters are wont to attack the source when they can not dispute the content. See how silly that looks? Don't agree with being labelled "far left" or "authoritarian"? Think this type of comment lowers the quality of the discourse? Refrain from this type of rhetoric and you'll be spared this type of retort.

Gordonjcp 4y ago
I'm extremely far left, for which I make no apologies. You need to be aware that this is a newspaper originally founded in the 1930s by the Fascist Party, and fully supportive of Hitler and Mussolini. Edit: no it wasn't, this was the one founded in the mid-19th century, who were highly supportive of slaughtering natives in India, and then went on to be highly supportive of Hitler and Mussolini by the early 20th century. This is literally a newspaper for people who are happy to walk around outside with a Union Jack on their shirt and a swastika armband. Edit: This bit is still true.
- the_third_wave 4y ago
  > This is literally a newspaper for people who are happy to walk around outside with a Union Jack on their shirt and a swastika armband. > I'm extremely far left, for which I make no apologies. Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Nicolae Ceaușescu, etcetera. All extremely far left, all guilty of heinous crimes against humanity. Do you support their policies, do you excuse their deeds because they were pursuing the ultimate goal of international socialism? Get a grip please, this is not Reddit. People walking around with a Union Jack on their shirt is fine by me, it is their national flag after all. People walking around with swastikas, hammers and sickles and other symbols of murderous ideologies is less so. How do you define your 'extremely far left' ideology? What makes it 'extremely far left'?
  - Gordonjcp 4y ago
    The union jack is ideologically identical to a swastika, at this point. Look at some of the far-right leaders - Margaret Thatcher, George Bush, Saddam Hussein, Ayatollah Khomeni, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mussolini, name omitted to avoid triggering Godwin, Boris Johnson, Tony Blair - all extremely far right, all guilty of heinous crimes against humanity. Do you stand with them?
    - the_third_wave 4y ago
      You did not answer my question on how you defined your 'far-left' ideology nor did you answer the 'yes/no' question I posed earlier. Have a go at it? As to me standing with the ragtag assembly of disparate leaders who you label as 'extremely far right' [1] I wonder why you ask since I do not label myself as 'far-right' nor as 'right'. Those labels are just silly since political thought is not 2-dimensional. I sometimes agree with the "right", sometimes with the "left" (as in "traditional left", not the modern identity-politics lunacy), in some ways I tend more towards anarchy, in other ways I deem there to be a need for more authority. [1] ...which is odd given that Hussein was the leader of the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party, Khomeini was pushed to power by leftists [2] some of whom continued to support him after it became clear he was intent on implementing a theocracy, Blair is a champagne socialist, Johnson a centrist populist, Pol Pot, Stalin and Hitler are various types of (inter)national socialists, Bush (which one? H.W or W?) a centre-right corporate puppet and Thatcher - finally someone who can be called 'right-wing' - just a straight right-winger. [2] https://marxismexplained.com/2020/11/27/iran-revolution-1979/ https://marxismexplained.com/2020/11/27/iran-revolution-1979...

twawaaay 4y ago

So is the news true or not? It should be pretty simple in this case, because if for the news to not be true it would mean they are not in fact rewriting Agatha Christie books at all? So which is it, do you have any knowledge? Or do you suggest to only read news from sources aligned politically with your views regardless of whether there is or isn't any true in the news? Anyway, in my opinion people who read the news and disregard facts that don't agree with their opinions is what I think is wrong with the world at the moment. Because of large number of these people, lying actually starts making sense, at least if you only care about getting elected. Because then what you say doesn't matter, the only thing that matters is whether you are able to exploit existing divisions to hijack voters by telling lies that agree with voters' emotions.

Gordonjcp 4y ago
> So is the news true or not? As you well know, this is not a binary decision. > It should be pretty simple in this case Mmm. Should it? Agatha Christie stories have been rewritten a bit over the 100 years she has been published, most notably "Ten Little Indians", which was released in the US as "And Then There Were None", but was first published in 1939 with a different noun in the title which I will not provoke a response by using. I think they were still publishing it in the UK up until the 1970s under the original title! This article, however, is trying to froth up the beetroot-faced "pint of carling and a filthy joke" Union-jack-t-shirt-wearing segment over "political correctness gone mad". Bear in mind that this is the newspaper that was founded by Fascists for Fascists in the 1930s, and most recently had a headline on the front page saying we should be machine-gunning refugee boats to stop them landing in the UK.
- foldr 4y ago
  I mostly agree with you, but both here and in your original comment you're confusing the Daily Telegraph with the Daily Mail. The Telegraph is a broadsheet, not a tabloid, and was founded in 1855, before Fascism was really a thing. It would help the credibility of what you were saying if you didn't keep making this basic mistake. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Telegraph https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Telegraph