DJ360

I'm just 'chillin' and watching a film called Green Book. If you haven't seen it it concerns Don Shirley, a black American pianist and composer, who I'd never heard of but who did live ..and his time with a New York American Italian club bouncer as his driver. Terrific soundtrack and an interesting story. Picko is coming to Liverpool tomorrow. So, first trip to the Cavern for a while

Yes, no wonder you 'wink', because as I keep saying there is no, zero, nada, zilch info on who donates. I rest my case.

IEA is CLEARLY right wing by its very nature, but it won't admit it. The left wing orgs you quote are open about their politics AND funding. I refuse to accept that you cannot see the difference. A mission has overtones of righteousness. As opposed to an 'objective', which has no such associations and iI think more properly reflects the objectives of the IEA. Where did I say there was? You raised members fees, not I.

I am very sure that Independent Schools cannot properly be seen as charities and I've been at pains to explain why. Political donations, clearly a grey area. Any UK charity, is permitted to campaign “for a change in the law, policy or decisions where such change would support the charity’s aims”, where such a campaign “must not be the continuing and sole activity of the charity”.

I said it sounds innocuous. That was my point..it's a serious distortion of their real objective (Not 'mission', which is another very deliberately chosen but innaccurate characterisation.) So what? Here's the Wikipedia view of the IEA. Rather less edifying than their own 'saintly' propaganda. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Economic_Affairs What you are completely missing is that both of the above make no secret of their political affiliations and objectives, their methods, their members and especially their don

You are still missing the point. Sunak rambled on vaguely about ill defined British Values. In response and in the absence of any meaningful definitions by Sunak, Murphy clearly stated that he was going to use Tory policies and actions to seek some clarity on Tory Govt. values, and that's what he did. Surely it is reasonable to assume that Tory actions, policies and pronouncements echo their values? If they don't, what are they playing at? Libraries. A nice right wing paper this time. You'll have to look well down the page, but the Telegraph mentions Libraries as one of many Publi

Who's failing to recognise AS? I'm sure there's an element of AS, in the protests, just as there's an element of anti Muslim reaction to the protests. These things are never tidy. But..how do you separate that from genuine and widespread disgust at Israeli Govt. and IDF actions in Gaza? We've been here before. Israel has a right to defend itself, not to exterminate the population of Gaza. My reading is that Starmer is terrified of any hint of AS being pinned on him and Sunak is terrified of upsetting the US.

Finally returning to 'The Rise of the Far Right' Ok, so we've got your standard blanket dismissal out of the way... What next? Now we're getting somewhere. Clear collaboration between Tories and American Far Right Criminal Steve Bannon. It would be too simplistic just to dismiss Truss as a 'useful idiot', which she undoubtedly is.. because she has supporters here. I'm not sure of the legal stuff here but her statements about UK politics, Govt. and Civil Service on US TV are at least arguably subversive and seditious. Let's just st

Frankly, in the last few weeks I've barely seen any coverage of protests. I watch BBC news several times a day plus occasional forays into ITV, CH4 and Sky. I'm pretty sure that if there was serious disorder on the streets..especially the streets of London, I'd have heard about it. I haven't. Are the 'Palestine'/Gaza protests 'spontaneous'? I doubt it, but then what protest is? They are all organised to an extent, but being held in public places allows for all and sundry to join in if they wish. I've no doubt that some will have 'extremist' ambitions, but there are plenty of law

I didn't say he'd created a 'scatter diagram' consciously, but to my mind that's a reasonable interpretation of what he wrote. Remember the context. Murphy was writing a response to Sunak's rambling, ill-defined and blatantly electioneering appeal to 'British Values.' from the priveleged platform of 10 Downing St. It's obvious what Sunak was up to. He was seeking, yet again, to blame others, to create scapegoats and to justify further attacks on Citizen's rights, especially around the right to peaceful protest. And yet he couldn't even bring himself to condemn the wor

And in more than a few cases historically, and some quite recent, retribution was meted out to innocent parties.

You don't mention 'Right Wing Claptrap'. Fruedian exception or a deliberate skewing of the debate? I think we should be told!

I too have disabilities, and a Blue Badge to prove it, but I'm not clear what you are getting at here. Are you saying that as a Tory voter you are affronted by the assertion that the Tory Govt. (Whose attitudes and policies Murphy is examining) harbours a dislike for people with disabilities? Why is that? As far as I know you are not part of this Govt. and whilst you maintain a right wing political stance you have said more than once that you are not impressed by the present Govt. I'm pretty certain that what Murphy is getting at here is the constant scapegoating of those on ben

I'm, suprised you don't see it for what it is. It's Murphy challenging Sunak's Downing Street Diatribe and seeking clarity on what exactly are the 'British Values', which Sunak was so typically vague about a couple of days ago, but which Sunak claims to wish to uphold. It was Sunak using the oldest right wing trick in the book by appealing to vague notions of 'Britishness', in order to recruit the hard of thinking to his 'side', against an ill define, but strongly hinted at 'otherness'. In other words, classic right wing division, fearmongering, scapegoating and deflection from the real issu

The point I was making was that fundmentally, nothing has changed. The rich and powerful continue to defend theire position, largely by removing access to wealth and power from the majority. Lord Clifton (Not, I hasten to add any relation as far as I can tell to our own Cliff-ton ), seems to have been the very definition of a corrupt 'political gangster'. It would be a big mistake to assume that such characters do not continue to exert power, both within and outside of Parliament. They Do.

You have the right to express your opinion that it is whatever you think it is. You do not have the right to determine that it has 'no place here'. You could try declaring it illegal and/or in contravention of the site AUP, but I doubt you'd get far.

I'm on my phone at the moment which isn't really conducive to political discussion. However I just watched a very interesting t.v. prog about Nottingham, describing a situation in which people were exploited, underpaid and many in extreme poverty. Their employment was insecure and being poor was seen as their fault. Social and financial inequality was maintained by those in power. Politics was corrupt and protest was met by armed force. 'Walking Victorian Britain' Channel 5 and on My5 The extremes may have changed but the underlying power resides largely with the descend

Which is why, during the 'no politics' period, whenever I challenged comments based on prejudices and stereotypes, I got accused of 'making it political', when in fact it already was. The politics thread allows ALL MEMBERS to comment on or discuss politics, without it disrupting other topics. All that is required is adherence to the site AUP and keeping things civil.

Re: Mick2Me. He did..and an awful lot of pro Brexit stuff. I don't recall much complaint back then...

Sunak is attempting to re-frame largely peaceful protests around Gaza as an 'attack on Democracy', when it is plain to me that the real threat to democracy is this increasingly repressive and increasingly Far Right Govt.

Tax Research UK Blog is written by Richard Murphy unless otherwise stated and published by Tax Research LLP under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. Design by Andy Moyle Richard Murphy Read more about me

Judging by comments from local Rochdalians, he seems to have successfully conned many local Muslims. In short.. Yes. I don't doubt that he tapped into 'Pro Palestinian' and 'Anti-Israeli' sentiment. Whether those factors really translate into 'Pro Hamas' and 'Anti Semitism' is a moot point. He also tapped into the failure of both Tory and Labour to 'get off the fence'. Rochdale is 74% white, with the remaining 26% being 'non White' of which 18% are Muslim. Galloway seems to have gained from Labour, but the ethnicity/religio

Well obviously. We used to rule and plunder half of the World, now we don't and in many respects we are now getting our 'come uppance'. I see no simple way out of that mess. What is certain is that ALL empires fall, sooner or later and that history shows that 'sooner' is becoming the norm. Empires which used to last thousands and then hundreds of years, now last merely decades. ( Compare the Roman and Grecian to the Ottoman, Austro Hungarian, British, then the Russian/Soviet.) Meanwhile our mighty leaders have continued to behave as if we are still 'Top Dog' and have con

Indeed, and like everything else he says, superficially 'right on', but fundamentally meaningless. He trades on that sort of drivel. He's a smooth operator and a con man 'par excellence', but he ultimately lacks substance.

And meanwhile...