Comments by "J Drake1994" (@JDrakeify) on "Owen Jones meets Yanis Varoufakis | 'Europe is staring into the abyss'" video.

  1. +Alex Roebuck he might have, but he was fired before negotiations ended, and in any case he was only one voice in a cabinet, and he was not the PM, there only so much he could do.
    1
  2. Konstant Papas But as Yanis says, he believed that it was possible to negotiate an agreement that was favourable to Greece at the time, and he still seems to think that. It is not Syriza's fault if they encouraged something they genuinely thought was possible.
    1
  3. Helen Russell No they didnt. A few individuals who were in the military said they would have reservations about Corbyn, but that was not the military as a whole, indeed many generals have said those people stepped out of line when they said that.  The Armed Forces never released a statement saying they would depose Corbyn if he were elected or anything like that. 
    1
  4. Helen Russell Evidence?
    1
  5. Helen Russell No I didnt, I said a few individuals (two by my count, and one of those anonymous) within the military said that they would have an issue with Corbyn being PM. Neither openly advocated for a coup, and even if they did, the armed forces never came close to officially stating that that is what they would do as a collective, and you can't provide me with evidence that they did. And, actually, stuff like that has been said before, look up the plot against harold wilson, some in the military did not like him to say the least, but that never came to anything either.  And I don't get the part about the EU superstate. Seeing as many on the left are not federalists either, it seems like a complete non sequitur.
    1
  6. Helen Russell There was with the military and the secret service, where some elements seemed to have the idea that he was a Soviet sleeper agent, and there was talk of a military coup in those circles. This isnt a conspiracy theory or anything, it is widely acknowledged to be historical fact now. The BBC even did a documentary on it.
    1
  7. Helen Russell Yes, my point was not that he was universally hated, it was that elements within the military and secret services didnt like him, you may have been there, but I doubt you were privy to what was going on in certain circles of certain institutions.
    1
  8. Helen Russell No, I was not, but I have the facts on it, and seeing as you apparently had never heard of this before, I doubt you have examined the facts enough to be able to evaluate the truth behind it with any real authority.Wilson, and his secretary Marcia Williams met with reporters after he left office to talk to them about this, and they are on tape talking about it ,so evidently Wilson, who you admire so much, thought there was a plot, and there are multiple other sources from people who are hardly Labour friendly who corroborate that. And I dont know why you keep on repeating your admiration for Wilson, I dont have any issue with him. Though I would note that the government he presided over a country that was probably more left wing than anything Corbyn is actually advocating for policy wise.
    1
  9. Helen Russell then i'd have thought that you'd be a bit more rational, and not reject things out of hand without even examining the facts. As for Corbyn, I have never said that I think he will be elected. But actually look at his policies, ie the ones he officially advocated for during the leadership campaign. They include: free tuition, nationalised rail, a living wage, no nuclear weapons, and stronger trade unions. They are by no means Marxist, as you suggested, they are social democratic. He said he would be viewed as depressingly moderate in Germany, and he was right. Surely you can see that if you are as knowledgeable as you claim to be.
    1
  10. Helen Russell I find that hard to believe considering some of the insults you have been throwing around in this discussion thus far. I have actually been trying to have a substantive conversation. And since when do you take "As for Corbyn, I have never said that I think he will be elected" as meaning that I think that he is my 'saviour'. I was merely pointing out how he is not nearly as radical as he is sometimes portrayed to  be. For what its worth, I think his domestic policies, like the ones I just listed, are great, but I have some disagreements with him on foreign policy. That, and I also think he is objectively a bad leader in spite of his policies. So I think he ought to go before 2020, but I do not think his policies, though a welcome departure from the consensus. are all that radical for a western democracy, and I hope Labour keep them in the long run.
    1
  11. Helen Russell So you accept that you are into 'bar room brawl' discussions after all? That aside, I also doubt that you suspend your capacity for rational debate when you are not working. And yet, you were unable to back up your claim that the British military (as a collective) has explicitly said it will remove Corbyn if he became PM. You also werent aware of the talk of a military coup against Wilson, which is well known amongst many commentators of various political persuasions, and even those who follow politics, but do not do it for a living. Maybe I could accept that, but then you dismissed my claims out of hand without even being presented with any evidence.  You also claimed "95% of our directives come directly from Brussels". But according to full fact, that number is at best 62%, depending upon how you count.  https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-law-what-proportion-influenced-eu/ https://fullfact.org/europe/two-thirds-uk-law-made-eu/ So your arguments havent really been evidence based or logical so far. Your claims to expertise have thus far really been used more as bluster to avoid answering when I make a factual point.
    1
  12. Helen Russell Fine, but you just proved my point about how you would rather belittle people than have a rational debate.
    1
  13. Helen Russell I didnt claim to know everything. That is why I brought in sources to back me up, when you just had unsubstantiated claims. But I expect you to argue back to prove me wrong on the things I do claim to know, rather than claim to be above argument,. Your the one being arrogant, not me. 
    1
  14. Helen Russell Well if you have all that experience then you dont need to be as smart as you claim to be to see that you should be able to be a bit more substantive then you have been thus far, and a bit less arrogant. The links I provided you with were from a website who fact check politicians as professionals,and cite academic work in there arguments. Surely they are just as qualified as you claim to be.  Look, you can claim to be as much of an expert as you like, but giving your credentials  is not a substitute for a proper response when someone challenges you on a point. And you haven't given me propers answers, you just stated how intellectually below me you think I am. 
    1
  15. Helen Russell If you are so willing to discard facts which are not mine, but from people who are equally qualified, if not more so than you supposedly are, then you cant be very open minded person. Aren't academics supposed to take into account the opinions of other experts in forming there opinions? I see no need to give you any qualifications, because they are irrelevant if you cannot counter my arguments properly. Qualifications determine the knowledge of a subject a person supposedly has, and yet you have been unwilling to demonstrate this knowledge, and when you have you havent given any proper evidence. If someone is well qualified, they should be able to defeat people on the arguments,not by talking about there qualifications. 
    1
  16. Helen Russell You dont need to block me, I just wont respond again if you really dont want me too. 
    1