3. Is our foreign policy full of horrific double standards from top to bottom? Yes. We do deals in blood with other evil regimes.
4. Is anti-Chinese racism growing in the UK? Yes.
5. Is the average Chinese person's carbon footprint much less than the average Briton's? Yes.
6. Is the US the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons against a people? Yes.
7. Has the US also committed genocide? Yes it has, on several occasions.
8. Is there any point to "why won't you condemn China? Why won't you condemn China?" Not really, no.
HOWEVER...
9. It's not like Burgon uses the same reasoning to not condemn Saudi Arabia or not condemn Israel. He does so all the time. That makes his failure to do so here weird.
10. Is this good politics? No. It's embarrassingly bad politics. It's student union-level politics.
When Corbyn was repeatedly asked by Stephen Nolan to condemn the IRA, and he wouldn't, that was the most awful politics. Because it did his and his party's chances of winning an election enormous harm.
Burgon hasn't helped Labour or the left with these comments. He's harmed both
Of course genocide is going on in Xinjiang, right now. Against the very Muslims whose treatment the left is always rightly livid about whenever it's Israel or Saudi Arabia doing it.
The right are selectively blind, but so is the left. It's bizarre.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is pretty stupid and horribly cynical at the best of times.
But way, way too many on the left take the attitude of "the enemy of the US is my friend". Before demanding of our own government things they never demand of their 'friends'.
Over the years, this has gone to such extremes that it's led to:
- Denying Saddam Hussein had committed genocide against the Kurds
- All but cheerleading Putin
- Saying about Ahmadinejad's rants against the West "he's got a point"
- Mass apologia for Assad
- Romanticising Chavez
- Blaming the US and CIA for literally anything that's wrong in South America
- Denying anything is wrong in 'socialist paradise' Venezuela
- And now, this. Refusal to call a spade a spade. Refusal to call genocide by China what it is. Genocide.
When I see the UK and most of the West STILL refusing to recognise the Armenian Genocide over 100 years later, it makes me sick. It's disgusting, monstrous, indefensible.
I think the same about this. It's genocide, Richard. And you help no-one by refusing to say so.
I'm not in the business of providing an apologia for one of the most monstrous regimes on the planet.
And nor should any 'progressive' anywhere.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Free societies only function effectively when the citizens act within the law, with respect for and responsibility towards each other.
The UK govt has broken that social contract many times over. But so have the unvaccinated (except those who can't be so for medical reasons).
It's not about "there's only a small risk to me; I'll take my chances thanks". It's entirely about increasing the risk to everyone else.
It's also about overwhelming hospitals with unvaccinated people - so others with life-threatening conditions die.
If you've actively chosen to endanger others through your own choices of refusing the vaccine (unless, I re-emphasise, your health means you can't be vaccinated) and/or refusing even to wear a mask, you don't get to stamp your feet and whine about consequences.
McCoist - who dressed up as Hearty Harry the week before the Rangers-Hearts Coca-Cola Cup Final in 1996, and when he did his big reveal, the Hearts fans laughed along with him - is quite amazing. Best summariser ever.
Keane definitely won't like the comparison, but he's Eamon Dunphy's true heir if you ask me. And DEFINITELY plays up to his image all the time.
I'd add James Richardson to the 'universally loved' category and take out Barry Davies: who I was in awe of but who divided opinion.
But compare and contrast McCoist's sheer love of the game with the absolutely horrendous Mark Lawrenson: whose rise coincided with the BBC's football coverage disappearing off a cliff.
Since 1970, Everton, one of English football's great clubs, have finished above Liverpool on four occasions. 4 times in 51 (about to become 52) years.
Since 1970, Everton have won 5 major trophies. Liverpool have won 35 major trophies in that time.
Since 1970, Everton have played 57 games at Anfield. They've won 6 of them.
None of the above is a pop at them. It's to ask "why?" Contrary to Rafa or even Shanks' wind-ups in the past, Everton aren't a small club. And they've spent bucketloads in recent years.
So why are they so continually inferior to their biggest rivals?
And yep, they were robbed of the chance of winning the European Cup in 1986 - but that doesn't explain away half a century of near total mediocrity.
I wish my life was as (ostensibly) simple as a pigeon's.
Me: if I get annoyed about something, I rant about it on Twitter.
Pigeon: if I get annoyed about something, I dance around in a circle while making cute noises.
Me: if I run out of money for food, I have a problem.
Pigeon: Money? What's that? If I run out of food, I dance around in a circle making cute noises at my human so he gives me more.
Me: If my toilet blocks, I have a problem.
Pigeon: Toilets? What are those? I shit wherever I want, all the damn time.
Me: It's hard to find a mate. It's a tough world out there.
Pigeon: All I have to do is dance around in a circle making cute noises and they just flock to me. I even have a special penthouse opposite where I take the laydeez.
Me: Bureaucracy is the bane of my life in Uruguay.
When benefit sanctions were brought in, I found myself wondering:
"What, exactly, do the public think happens to someone with no money and no family to stay with for months?"
The answer is that plenty of them died. Not that most British people could've given a shit.
Here we are again now.
"What, exactly, do people think happens to someone who either pays 9% more than everyone else for 30 years, or if they 'never have to pay the debt', it's because THEY EARN LESS THAN MOST PEOPLE?"
"Graduate tax", my arse. National insurance going up (the young expected to pay for the old AGAIN)... plus income tax, plus a further 9% of anything over the threshold.
Which the government may bring down to just 23K.
The theoretical idea behind tuition fees was because graduates would earn more than everyone else.
Except they don't. The vast majority of them don't at all at any point. And we penalise and punish them regardless.