Has even the Daily Mail had enough of the tories? I'm kind of shocked.

Probably some sort of reader bait and switch medium/long play.

Would you care to cite some examples?

Thus spake the habitual Tory voter who apparently wants to feel better about humanity.

This is the most famous I guess



There are paragraphs in that book where if you change "white" with "black" and you said that in public you would be arrested in many European countries.

Even the title would create you a lot of legal troubles if it was "black" instead of whites


"Black fragility: why understanding there is no racism might be so hard for black people"-> are you sure this would be legally allowed in Scotland?

False equivalences like this ignore the diametrically opposed histories of black and white people.

Can you cite some of the paragraphs you've referred to?

Robin DiAngelo isn't in Scotland. Obviously that kind of neurotic elitist white American 'anti-racism' is in itself racist, since it attempts to seize and dictate the debate on behalf of the white governing class. (Like 'colour-blind casting' in films and TV, where black and Asian actors are humiliatingly and patronisingly and tokenistically hired to play white characters in order to suit a neurotic US agenda whose spores have unfortunately blown across the Atlantic.) But as a rule, in white-majority countries, racism against white people, unless on a very personal basis, is considered trivial because the overall power-structure doesn't support it. The US, of course, is only a white-majority country due to colonial settlement, the slave plantation system and the dispossession of the indigenous nations. This accounts for US white-liberal paranoid lunacy and is why those ideas shouldn't come over here -- although, because of idiots at the BBC and in universities and elsewhere, they often do. Britain, whatever mischief it once got up to overseas, is a white-majority country because this is Northern Europe and Britons are the aboriginal rootstock population since the last Ice Age ended 10,000 years ago.

Seemingly Police Scotland received a number of complaints against the First Minister for racism against white people. These appear to have been dismissed, but a properly defined law would not be open to that kind of thing, since a properly defined law would address objective harm and not a subjective sense of offence. As for Scottish politicians saying it's entirely up to the police to decide what the law means -- that's a somewhat unsurprising derogation of duty on the part of Scottish politicians.

The book is though, I was asking if the book itself can be banned under the new Scottish rules.

Btw in the USA people are starting to win court cases about discrimination on the job place because they are white, so things aren't so obvious

watching some 2019 election coverage reruns. the most striking thing is how much of a mess labour was in

keir has played his hand very skillfully

"Luciom you are strawmanning about a purported academic takeover of Marxists in the west"

Glasgow neo elected chief of university: Hasta la victoria sempre (fist up)

https://twitter.com/i/status/1778783617549844488

Ridiculous. One might as well say that US academia is becoming overrun by far right wing academics and post a Peterson video as support.

Oh wait, that's the person you're actually copying. What a coincidence.

If the head of a college in the USA said "hail hitler" at their inaugurational speech , YES , you could? or any other white supremacist official slogan.

"hasta la victoria siempre" is a very famous phrase by a very famous marxist terrorist, is that controversial? the totality of people in academia shouldn't just avoid using it, they should actively fight it as one of the worst evil in human history.

Or not, but then don't lie when i say marxism is prominent in academia, accepted, glorified.

Don't lie by calling Guevara a terrorist.

What lie? That icon of marxist was a bloody terrorist, one of the leaders (behind only Castro) of the terrorist groups who usurped power violently in Cuba and installed a bloody regime after that.

I know that you guys on the left consider revolutionaries some kind of heroes, they are still terrorists.

And even if you disagree with the label, Che is one of the most iconic marxists in the world, so the topic of "marxism at the top echelon of academia" still stands. We are now after the phase of "it didn't happen" to the phase of "it happened and it's good", according to you.

I know how you screechy hysterical far right types love to exaggerate but overthrowing a puppet regime isn't the definition of terrorism, which if you gave it a moment's thought you'd realise does require terror among the population to be present. Astonishing how words work isn't it.

Stop lying.

Deflection much? even under the leftist label of "revolutionary leader", still a marxist.

Citing him in an inaugural speech, is still marxism.

And marxism should have absolutely no place in colleges, as it is one of the most heinous ideologies ever developed in the history of the world.

Previously , when i said academic settings were rife with marxism, you denied that and said that was a fake narrative invented by peterson or whatever.

Now, when a college elects a leader which is an actual marxist, you only talk about the fact that you dislike that i consider a marxist "hero", a terrorist.

Do you admit that a person going with "hasta la victoria siempre" at his inaugural speech shouldn't exist in any institution in civil society? that it is a monstrous event, a disgusting thing we should all fight actively against? that marxism is fully incompatible with liberal democracy? that marxism is evil and should be eradicated? and that is is DOMINANT IN MANY COLLEGES which you previously denied?

Lots of shrieking but not a single attempt to justify the "terrorist" label you used for effect, completely inaccurately as usual.

why? you disagree, there is no way to prove/disprove as it is a subjective evaluation, why waste more time on it?

While the palestinian guy being marxist is objectively true given the "hasta la victoria siempre" (with raised fist) speech.

And of course you can't comment on that because you would need to start saying that actually, you don't dislike actual marxism at the head of civil institutions.

If the intention isn't to provoke terror in the population, someone cannot rightly be called a terrorist.

This...isn't...hard

Lol you keep the deflection going, good boy.

Not a bip about an actual marxist being elected at the head of Glasgow university, after you repeatedly fully denied marxism was rampant in anglo universities.

Let's just see you retract the nonsense about Guevara being a terrorist, then we can get on to the other nonsense in your post.

One nonsense at a time, please.

“Terrorism should be considered a valuable tactic when it is used to put to death some noted leader of the oppressing forces well known for his cruelty, his efficiency in repression, or other quality that makes his elimination useful. But the killing of persons of small importance is never advisable, since it brings on an increase of reprisals, including deaths.”

Only 300 of almost 10,000 complaints were vexatious according to Police Scotland. The blame for the high numbers lies with the Scottish Government and Police Scotland, both of whom have misrepresented what the law says (including the justice minister in the Scottish Parliament again yesterday).

Also, if you tell people it is their perception that defines whether something is a hate crime and this perception shouldn’t be challenged then this is to be expected. It was all predicted beforehand and senior police officers have warned about it and the impact it will have on trust in the police.


With regards to the perception point there is a new issue as, despite the publicity around it, it now appears the police have moved away from the idea of unchallenged perception and are making the decision as to what they perceive to be a hate crime rather than the person reporting it. We can’t be certain though as despite requests from journalists to confirm that is now the case they are refusing to answer questions about it.
We have a good example a few days ago where someone reported an anti semitic hate crime against a SNP MSP’s father and was told by police they didn’t accept that was the case as the reporter wasn’t Jewish. It’s a shambles.

starmer decent in pmqs today. spent most of it taking the piss out of the liz truss book

No policies then? Oh well at least we laughed before setting up the likes of truss to carry on.

Wes Streeting yesterday explaining why he would be more conservative than the tories. Marvelous!