General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Stephen Brookes
The New Culture Forum
comments

Comments by "Stephen Brookes" (@stephenbrookes7268) on "Paul Embery -- Despised: Why the Left Loathes the Working Class" video.

They are not the left. They don't represent me, they don't represent those that the left are supposed to support which is the workers of the world! Stop calling these imposters "The Left" or I will send man eating bees to your house.
11
He was a working class Tory!
8
@joesmith8701 Which describes the vast majority of people. Just look at some of the comments on this platform.
7
Firstly what does working class mean now? If you look at skilled non-professional people, many have had to spend as much time learning their trades as many white collar workers. They are able to make good money. There are some skilled workers whose industries have gone and find themselves under or wrongly skilled, taking work below their potential, but quite often in essential jobs. They are able to reskill and transfer skills if given access to reasonably priced training. A distinction is clear between these people and those that were never skilled or are less capable of gaining skills. Either way all of us have needs and aspirations. It is not right to drive incomes down for the masses by creating divisions in society based on outmoded social class categories. We all deserve a fair share of our collective wealth, that we all generate. Those that choose not to work can lay on the beds that they have made. Those unable to work are our collective responsibility. I believe we should have a good proportion of the resources available to the masses to encourage mobility for them. Currently we have a system blocking progress for most people.
7
@shoeflytoo My dear chap I can assure you that I have not changed my principles. If a new political or social movement arrives this cannot change my political position unless they reason me i to a change. BLM is a Fascist organisation, regardless of what they say. Look at what they stand for! They want to be the ultimate authority and kill people not like themselves. This is Fascism.
4
@jamesdellaneve9005 This is about semantics really. Have you heard the story of the Emperor's New Clothes? I am the one shouting look at the king! He is in the altogether! If you see one person walking down the street with a duck on a lead, and they tell you it is a dog and that they are a dog walker you might consider them either a bit eccentric, that they have been misled to believe this or they are trying to mislead you. If however, there were a sizeable number of them all telling you these are dogs and we are dog walkers, and at the head of the march is the chairman of the kennel club saying this is a bread of dog that has been around for millennia but has been misnamed and the chief sponsor of this enterprise is the world's greatest, wealthiest and most influential dog breeder, all telling you that this is a dog and we are just saying what it is not what people used to call it. One might, if they really are new to the dog world or have just a small amount of knowledge about dogs and even less about ducks, might be taken in by this movement. Or one might just say that is a fucking duck matey who are you trying to kid. They then find the duck walkers have burnt their house down, got them fired from their job and have killed their dog. I will not see a dog when I know it is a duck, even if everyone else in the world sees a dog.
3
If they no longer represent us then you are spot on. We the people need to form a new party that does.
2
Phil Phil what is overidingly obvious now is not that politicians are manipulating us, this has always been so, but that they are so blatantly doing so. That shows me that the vast majority of people are so unsophisticated in their thinking systems that the manipulation no longer needs to be subtle or sublime.
2
@DavidMartin-ru5zt Please do explain what is meant by "The Left"! Unless one has been through a long period of cult like indoctrination, which I have not, general terms encompassing multiple streams of individuals all of whom have only 1 trait in common, that being they do not subscribe to the indoctrination, have little meaning. Saying "The Left", as though everyone knows exactly what this means, only serves to identify anyone that says it as a dogmatised, indoctrinated drone.
2
@maudegonne3740 The point is why when we have a moderate centre right government are these nutters being entertained?
2
@shoeflytoo Bees were swarming last evening.
2
Mr Spoon That is an interesting analysis. The Tories are traditionally to the right, but this current government do seem to be centrist or put an other way, to the left of the Tory party. Thatcher was way over to the right of the party. The last Labour government were more right of the party but still left of Centre. In other words both parties have moved away from their traditional positions. That makes sense in a country that abhors authoritarian leadership. Back in the 70s the Labour government of Wilson and Callaghan had actually done a good job of getting unemployment down initially but that made the unions very powerful and they made greater demands of than could be realistically met. So the core Labour supporters were instrumental in bringing the country and the government to their knees. Thatcher then destroyed the unions by destroying their industries. Rather like a doctor curing a patient by decapitation. The problem was, the both followed an ideology without considering any alternatives. Blair sold the idea of a "Third Way", which worked well for a while. There is no ideal way, no ideology works long term. We have to accept that certain things must be run by the permanent secretariat for the benefit of the country in general and should be state owned and depoliticised. Transport, education, utilities and the services. We need to have a strong private enterprise sector, but not the cabal of super rich corporations milking the cash cows that were bought and paid for by the taxpayers. The banks do whatever they like and when they fail they simply hand over the debt burden to the taxpayers and award themselves a big bonus. That crap has to be stopped.
2
@jonathanhadley2555 I am intrigued to know what life will be like for the current 20-30s age group when they hit 60.
2
@Raw Engineer Did you study economics in Broadmoor?
2
@GlasPthalocyanine I campaigned during the run up to the 97 election for Labour, and although I felt that we had abandoned the key principle of the movement, we have to accept that the will of the people is what democracy is all about. Getting elected is what counts in order to form a government and we did that successfully. My feeling is that the a large majority current generation of voters do not understand what you have clearly stated. In order to have democracy we need more than one party. If we effectively dismiss any opposition by virtue of ignorance of what opposition means or by demonising all opposition as extremist loonies then we will sleep walk into totalitarianism. Recent government behaviour confirms this. The OP in this thread is literally a reactionary moron! There is no sense in what he says and no amount of education can help this level of brain death!
2
@GlasPthalocyanine I wanted to give Labour my time because I saw in Tony a very charismatic leader who was able to get everyone together. I was not in favour of dropping clause 4, however I do believe that it needed to be revised and clarified. I think the essential utilities should not be owned by private enterprise as they are essential for our lives, so need to be run by publically responsible managers, as privatised industries they have become cash cows for undeserving profiteers, and mostly now owned by foreign corporations. The profits from BT alone if held by the people would be able to reduce taxation for us all. The railways are difficult to make profits and be a viable public service, therefore it should not be attempted. I would also like to see the government running a not for profit banking system alongside private banks, to give better access to those of us that do not have rich dads to get business finance. This would also make banking much more competitive. I think it is essential for our freedom to have a strong entrepreneurial sector, but the basic resources should be centrally owned, like the roads are. The city owning everything is just a way to make the super rich superbly richer. State ownership of the nations assets would allow each of us an equal shot at getting a business running. As idealist as it may seem to be a Lib Dem in all honestly they are not much use and will never be in power, and when they did have a chance they kissed the arses of the Tories. They are not responsible enough to be a government. In theory PR is a great idea, but in practical terms it would require everyone to play fair, and human beings are not too good at that.
2
@GlasPthalocyanine It is entirely irrelevant when it happened. It is what happened and why that we are talking about. I admire your confidence that humans have fundamentally changed in the last 90 years. Although it would be great if they had it is unlikely as they seem to behave in the sae way as they have for millennia. If we have PR now exactly the same will happen as happened in Weimar. I do not believe that PR will do what you claim. In fact, I believe that it will achieve the opposite. I fully agree that in principle it offers an ideal equitable solution, however as we have already discussed regarding ideologies. They are all fine in principle and all have virtues to a point, but humans always look for their personal advantage, how they can get more, faster and better than the next person, how they can dominate. Then the psychos and narcissists rise to the top and back we go in the cycle. I want you to give me more information as to why you think PR will produce the effects that you claim. How would it protect from extremism? Extremism can ONLY flourish in a PR system. We shall put the unemployment situation on the back-burner cos it’s a “don’t get me started on that” kind of subject. You are definitely onto something about people not reading enough. Although maybe not reading newspapers is not such a bad idea, it does mean that most people are learning spoken word dogmas, rather than studying to form opinions from a wide range of information. The trouble with word of mouth indoctrination is that it is very difficult to dislodge this kind of propaganda. As Jonathan Swift said: “You cannot reason someone out of something he or she was not reasoned into!”.
2
@delboyg01 Does that not just describe all politicians?
1
@delboyg01 Your statement is similarly flippant to mine, and also contains an element of truth. We do not choose the politicians that we elect. An election is the ability to select from a group of individuals who have been preselected by whomever because of whatever. We often have no idea who has put this person up for election. It would be impossible for any one person to fully understand the workings of running a country, there may be a small percentage of well informed people that fully or partially understand some of it. The vast majority of people do not have the capacity to fully understand everything that is set out in a manifesto even if they were to have read it, which it is highly unlikely that they ever did, do or will. So as you say it is all totally down to who we believe. I personally believe it is unwise to believe politicians. Elections are therefore mostly decided on one or two, often minor and usually populist points, explained by people with a vested interest in getting elected regardless of fitness for purpose. The vast majority of the manifesto not being understood by the electorate or even mentioned, allowing some really unpleasant policies to fly under the RADAR of public opinion and choice. My question is; are any politicians worthy of trust to that extent? In my opinion they are mostly unfit to rule us, and the electorate are also mostly unfit to make an informed choice even when informed!
1
@DavidMartin-ru5zt Yeah I have fully ascertained that you are a drone.
1
@georgeboag9614 Distractions divert the eye from one hand while the other makes the coin disappear!
1
@shoeflytoo The left right spectrum is just that. It has infinite extremes. Fortunately I live in democracy. It is unlikely that we will elect an extremist government. Our current government is moderate centre right. They are enabling some of this woke shit to happen because we want everyone here to feel part of a whole. However if 85% or more of the electorate feel that they have become disenfranchised, the incumbent government will want to be re-elected and the opposition will also want to. So they will appeal to the masses. If that doesn't happen then we will have a revolution and all the extremists will kill each other, the moderates will clean up the mess and the head master will say ok chaps are we done now? Good we shall carry on as before your majesty!
1
Mr Spoon What is your understanding of what political left and right each represent? Do bear in mind the degrees are infinite.
1
Mr Spoon It is not irrelevant. The swing in political ideology towards the centre does have a definite bearing. If you dilute anything you make it weaker. Democracy is weakened if you eliminate opposition. Post democratic maybe. Authoritarianism is definitely going to increase, that is the goal of encouraging disorder. I doubt if it will be communism though. Communism is supposed to be about collective ownership of resources so that each citizen has a share of the wealth. They won't want to share anything with us.
1
@jamesdellaneve9005 What would I call whom?
1
Jake Haynes Essentially there is no reppresentative left party anymore. I am sure was a card carrying member of Labour, and even campaigned during the 97 election, but in order to get elected the core principles had to be compromised, due to the ignorance and false beliefs of the electorate as to what Labour stood for. We need a new force to represent the Centre left.
1
@k_tess The ”Champagne Socialist" is nothing new. The biggest problem with any ideology is ideologues. Left wing politics are supposed to represent the majority, that is the ethos. Over representation of and unequal bias towards minorities is fundamentally in opposition to left wing ethos. Most of the voiciferous virtue signallers do not even represent the minority groups that they claim to. In any case those people that are being classified as *...minority group, are actually all part of the greater majority of the population. I E the 99%, if only they all would realise that solidarity is colour blind, cares not about gender, sexuality or any other divisive identity label. We are all in it together and being collectively screwed by the banksters.
1
jhan bass When people make generalization statements, that is usually an indication of a general misunderstanding of practically everything.
1
@jonathanhadley2555 What has been done extremely successfully is to bribed sufficient of the electorate with populist policy statements that amount to nothing and pretending to cut taxes. The electorate are also so brainwashed to believe that anything that does not give ultimate power to the elite is a bad thing, and any form of politics that is for the benefit of the people is going to be bad for them. What is worse they are so, inert, afraid and dependent on authority figures that they would not rebel against any form of oppression. I am certain that if the government were to say "line up over there by the barbed wire fence for your vaccinations" an orderly queue of sheeple would form. " Don't worry about the armed guards and hermetically sealed shower rooms, the Troy party are your friends!" they will be lapping it up until their final breaths
1
@jonathanhadley2555 you know it!
1
@jonathanhadley2555 The current generation needs to understand that their attitudes will be visited upon them negatively.
1
@jonathanhadley2555 In answer to your question is it good or bad, That is both dependent on one's point of view and remains to be seen. My opinion is that any form of group think is a bad idea. Controlling what we say leads to controlling what we think. Didn't someone write a book about this that I often quote?
1
@Don-Royall It is not that I don't want to see it. I see it. What I don't like is what you have so eloquently and elegantly stated; that the extremists have totally overshadowed the moderates. I am also not convinced that the left wishes to be so self destructive. My thoughts are that all politics are being driven by forces other than what is being shown. We are all being manipulated, many of us know that. The only losers in a political environment that effectively has no practical opposition are the masses. We are being sleepwalked into totalitarianism worldwide! I can assure you that I, fully eyes wide open, can see that.
1
@andyhoward940 Please add a predicate. I am not sure which way to interpret your comment. Do you feel the centre right are overshadowed by extremists? I think having an extreme point of view is ok, as long as it is not give power. When extremism becomes a problem is when it is authoritarian and gains or worse still assumes power. That is when freedom ends.
1
@andyhoward940 Hard to disagree with that.
1
J D What is the weather like on your planet? Or should I ask what time the nurse comes round with the pretty coloured pills, ask her for two extras!
1
J D WTF are you are talking about? Apart from the bad English, incomplete ideas and misconceptions about what is left and what is right. I cannot imagine how anyone other than you and maybe your psychiatrist will ever be able to decipher what is going on in your mind!
1
@Lytton333 You on the other hand display your intellect in full in just one sentence. You give full credence to my assertion that as stupid as the average person might be 50% of the population fall below that level. You must have many members in your club.
1
@johnnhoj6749 Yeah I cannot detect any piety , sneering or nagging in your comment.
1
@SuperMattmonkey The gold standard in 1971? You must have shared a cell with Raw Engineer, or are you both in a cult?
1
@Raw Engineer Ad hominem is attacking the person. I attacked the concept and suggested it might an insane idea. I do not believe your unqualified comments as factual. They are simplistic and innacurate. If you can back them up with facts that would be great. I am sure that the library at Broadmoor will have the relevant academic references. I have doubts that you can read something and reliably recount it accurately going by calling me Steve. I have a pH balance.
1
@GlasPthalocyanine Credulity is a habit.
1
@GlasPthalocyanine What do you know about the Wiemar Republic? That is an example of PR in action. It is highly open to abuse.
1
@GlasPthalocyanine It is a very flawed system. The candidates are chosen, and not by the electorate, the press can use the crudest and most stupid comments to influence voters. There is no credible opposition as people are associating the mainstream labour party with the extreme left. We are currently in a defacto totalitarian plutocracy. Our rights are being trampled on using the guise of public safety. The PM has already very casually told us that troops will be deployed to enforce lock down laws. This looks very much like a coup d'etat.
1
@GlasPthalocyanine How about this. We have an upcoming referendum on keeping our current system, changing to PR or something completely different. Tell me the full mechanics of PR. Firstly please understand this, we have many areas of agreement and you explain your reasoning on those areas. On the subject of PR you are reticent to give an in depth analysis. I do not disagree that electoral reform is necessary. I am not displaying nor do I have any mental blocks about PR. If you have given it as much thought as it deserves you should know all of its possible pitfalls and have solutions. I am not going to vote for PR on a campaign that says either you agree with me or you must have a mental block. Please tell me how you have come to see PR as the most virtuous system. Sell it to me!
1
SolidSnake 1964 Yes I know that. It is indeed a fact, however this is also a fact. There are other countries in the world! Europe abandoned the gold standard in the 30s. I will in future try to remember that many commenters in here are American and accept that as the reason why their comments sound so insane or idiotic. I would never even associate the name Richard Nixon with any form of conspiracy, that would be very silly wouldn't it?
1
SolidSnake 1964 That is also true! What is it you are trying to argue about?
1
SolidSnake 1964 They withdrew their comments!
1
SolidSnake 1964 The behavior of people that are in a cult is very stereotypical. Regardless of what is said to them, if it is not precisely the mantra that they have been indoctrinated with it is wrong and therefore should be opposed! If you see this happening you are in all probability witnessing a cult member, if you are doing this other people will assume that you are in a cult. The cult member will just think that they are right all of the time and everyone else is wrong! I will let you assess your own definition of normal and determine what fits in with you interpretation of normality.
1
SolidSnake 1964 Although I wasn't talking about Bretton Woods, it wasn't clear that the comment I was answering was either. The "Gold Standard" is actually something completely different. This is what happens when people make comments but do not have on depth knowledge of what they are saying. They use simplistic terms to describe complex things, yet when they are challenged, they delete their comments, and then it is left for someone else to misinterpret.
1