The public were told that there was "no risk"?
We must have imagined Project Fear, then.
We must have imagined Project Fear, then.
https://twitter.com/ScarthLloyd/status/1321382704953384960
Summarised here...
It was one of many tweets that had been triggered by Claire Fox appearing on BBC Radio 4.
It sends them into spasms of rage.
It sends them into spasms of rage.
I've *long* resisted arguments such as this... I've had long, ongoing, heated arguments with people, and I've said that we cannot make these kind of arguments.
But now I think Remain is some kind of pathology. It totally precludes reason. Read the 'trending' link.
But now I think Remain is some kind of pathology. It totally precludes reason. Read the 'trending' link.
It's totally irrational. Inconsolable. Absolutely mental.
https://twitter.com/zoesqwilliams/status/1321377891289124865
It was a show *about* debate between strong, seemingly entrenched positions!
That's what they don't like...
They hate debate. They hate it because to admit to debate is to admit that one's view is contestable.
That's not in their outlook, or in their view of themselves.
That's what they don't like...
They hate debate. They hate it because to admit to debate is to admit that one's view is contestable.
That's not in their outlook, or in their view of themselves.
It *literally* says:
"Anne McElvoy, working with conflict resolution experts Gabrielle Rifkind and Louisa Weinstein, invites two figures on opposing sides of an issue to listen to each other."
And Zoe Williams hears it, and wets her pants.
bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09…
"Anne McElvoy, working with conflict resolution experts Gabrielle Rifkind and Louisa Weinstein, invites two figures on opposing sides of an issue to listen to each other."
And Zoe Williams hears it, and wets her pants.
bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09…
It couldn't be more clearly stated that this show is about two opposing views, and that this is therefore likely to cause people with strong views to disagree with one of the viewpoints.
But...
"OH MY GOD SOMEONE ON THE RADIO IS SAYING SOMETHING I DISAGREE WITH!!!"
But...
"OH MY GOD SOMEONE ON THE RADIO IS SAYING SOMETHING I DISAGREE WITH!!!"
It is as monumentally f***ing stupid as deliberately tuning in to a radio show about food, and then losing your sh*t because you don't like radio shows about food.
This *has* to be pathological.
This *has* to be pathological.
They have the same reaction to *any* debate.
The referendum.
Climate change.
Certain issues around 'social justice'.
They find merely the expression of perspectives they don't like, and the implication that it is for people to decide for themselves which is right, offensive.
The referendum.
Climate change.
Certain issues around 'social justice'.
They find merely the expression of perspectives they don't like, and the implication that it is for people to decide for themselves which is right, offensive.
It's worth restating the show's principle: "to encourage both speakers to probe the values and experiences that underpin each other's beliefs".
This is remarkable. A failure to provide a platform for debate has been the very thing that has driven resentment of the BBC.
This is remarkable. A failure to provide a platform for debate has been the very thing that has driven resentment of the BBC.
I'm not about to turn my view of the BBC 180 degrees just b/c of 1 show.
But it makes clear that *some* BBC people do get it, whereas there Remains (pun intended) a contingent of people whose sense of entitlement is so overwhelming, they can't hide their hostility to democracy
But it makes clear that *some* BBC people do get it, whereas there Remains (pun intended) a contingent of people whose sense of entitlement is so overwhelming, they can't hide their hostility to democracy
If Zoe Williams knew anything at all, she would know that Claire Fox has been debating Risk Society -- a central tenet of Blairist ideology -- for decades.
Zoe Williams' ignorance is owed to her hostility to debate.
Zoe Williams' ignorance is owed to her hostility to debate.
https://twitter.com/zoesqwilliams/status/1321425002319781890
She thinks it is "lazy" to get someone who has been one of the UK's most vocal critics of the role of Risk Society in politics for three decades, to speak on the issue of risk.
It's just so unfathomably stupid.
It's just so unfathomably stupid.
https://twitter.com/zoesqwilliams/status/1321377891289124865
This is why I say, and Claire Fox will disagree with me on this, it will be a good day when the Guardian's war chest is depleted and the organisation folds.
It has given so much cover to so many ignorant arses.
It has given so much cover to so many ignorant arses.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
