EPTUK Politics Mega-thread - Page 453
| Forum Index > General Forum |
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk | ||
|
Longshank
1648 Posts
| ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And does the British Parlament have chairs that can be thrown or were they smart like the US congress and nailed those things to the floor? | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9956 Posts
On December 20 2018 00:15 Plansix wrote: Is this better than when that guy from the House of Lords tried to resign for being 5 minutes late and they spent a long period of time explaining how he was a good public servant and wouldn’t accept the resignation? Because that was also fun. And does the British Parlament have chairs that can be thrown or were they smart like the US congress and nailed those things to the floor? Dude people would get SO told off for throwing chairs. Sometimes they steal a staff or call someone stupid and the fucking news sites have a fit. Throwing a chair would be the end of democracy as we know it. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 20 2018 00:53 Jockmcplop wrote: Dude people would get SO told off for throwing chairs. Sometimes they steal a staff or call someone stupid and the fucking news sites have a fit. Throwing a chair would be the end of democracy as we know it. I’m not sure. It might be the highest level of democracy. The full force of citizen's will made manifest through physical action through their elected official. It is the canary in the coal mine for sure. It is how you know shit is getting real and this isn’t a game anymore. I’m not advocating for violence due to Brexit, just asking if you folks bolted down your chairs like we did in the US. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9956 Posts
On December 20 2018 01:05 Plansix wrote: I’m not sure. It might be the highest level of democracy. The full force of citizen's will made manifest through physical action through their elected official. It is the canary in the coal mine for sure. It is how you know shit is getting real and this isn’t a game anymore. I’m not advocating for violence due to Brexit, just asking if you folks bolted down your chairs like we did in the US. I don't actually know but interestingly there are two red lines on the floor that are just over 2 sword lengths apart to prevent any unwanted swordfighting. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9322 Posts
https://www.parliament.uk/visiting/virtualtour/ | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18387 Posts
On December 20 2018 01:14 Jockmcplop wrote: I don't actually know but interestingly there are two red lines on the floor that are just over 2 sword lengths apart to prevent any unwanted swordfighting. Unwanted by whom? Presumably if there were 2 swords in play, there were at least 2 people wanting the swordfight  | ||
|
Blitzkrieg0
United States13132 Posts
On December 20 2018 01:34 Acrofales wrote: Unwanted by whom? Presumably if there were 2 swords in play, there were at least 2 people wanting the swordfight Probably everyone else in the room. The winner is going to get into another argument and the sword worked pretty well the last time right | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
For another thing have you seen how much space there is between the benches? 2 swords will never even come close to touching. | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
On December 20 2018 07:51 Dangermousecatdog wrote: The 2 sword lengths business is utter tosh. For one thing I'm pretty sure the Houses of Parliament was built in the age of guns judging from the architecture. For another thing have you seen how much space there is between the benches? 2 swords will never even come close to touching. Have you been in the chamber? I have and it is a lot smaller than it looks. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On December 20 2018 07:51 Dangermousecatdog wrote: The 2 sword lengths business is utter tosh. For one thing I'm pretty sure the Houses of Parliament was built in the age of guns judging from the architecture. For another thing have you seen how much space there is between the benches? 2 swords will never even come close to touching. Westminster was built in 1016, burned to a crisp in 1834 and rebuilt 1840-1876. A rifle range was added in 1915. I'm not sure what "age of guns" means, but the introduction of guns did by no means mean that swords weren't used. In fact, british soldiers used swords in World War 1 (amongst other things obviously). The british army even adopted an entirely new design for a cavalry sword in 1908. Sure. Swords obviously were more or less worthless against gatling guns etc - but nonetheless, swords did still exist, and the source that's claiming that these red lines are to prevent sword fights also claims that there's purple ribbon loops by the coat hangers in the cloakroom to hang your sword. .. it's also the only source i could find for that, so.. Well. You know. Salt and stuff. A lot of it. Just pointing out that swords certainly were still commonly used even after guns were a thing. Have you been in the chamber? I have and it is a lot smaller than it looks. ![[image loading]](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/Travel/2017/March/commons%20D4GMT8.jpg?imwidth=1240) Well. If you're scottish, and using a ridiculously huge twohander, probably. Considering that a normal sword is around 80cm long, you do need to kinda lunge there. Picture btw is titled "John Kerry and William Hague not having a sword fight". I guess they work, those red lines. | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On December 19 2018 01:31 Plansix wrote: I always wondered why Labor couldn’t get more support given the dysfunction of the UK government right now, but then I found out that their leader basically supports the most extreme option when it comes to Brexit. Cynically, I sort of wonder if Corbyn wants the hard Brexit to happen and the economy to crash under the theory that Labor would sweep in the next election and he would be in power. The only thing better than getting exactly what you want is to be able to blame all the fall out on the opposition party. Nah, he's the British Bernie. Corbyn's a standards and principles guy. If he actually was being cynical he'd be all-in gung-ho EU is great, because the Labour voters would eat it up. Plenty of Labour voters are annoyed at him - some for the very first time - because they've realised they're pro-EU and he's anti. Probably not annoyed enough not to vote for him, but it cast the first beginnings of a shadow over Corbyn from the voter side. There's absolutely no doubt that he stuck a dagger in the Remain campaign by staying mostly off the trail and saying he was a skeptic. RE: ongoing discussion I now want to see the SNP delegation cooperating to chuck their bench at the Tories. If anyone could do it it's them. They generally all pull in the same direction, and they're probably furious enough to go ahead with it right now.. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On December 20 2018 11:13 m4ini wrote: Of course swords exist. Swords still exist in the military today, but no one in their right mind will use one if they could avoid it.1876 is already the age of rifles. Taking the earliest date of 1840, that's already 20 years after the Napoleonic wars, and infantry had pretty much stopped using swords in combat by then. Cavalry swords are a different matter, and ceremonial swords as well, and I suspect the rules wouldn't let you ride a horse instead of sitting on the benches anyways.Westminster was built in 1016, burned to a crisp in 1834 and rebuilt 1840-1876. A rifle range was added in 1915. I'm not sure what "age of guns" means, but the introduction of guns did by no means mean that swords weren't used. In fact, british soldiers used swords in World War 1 (amongst other things obviously). The british army even adopted an entirely new design for a cavalry sword in 1908. Sure. Swords obviously were more or less worthless against gatling guns etc - but nonetheless, swords did still exist, and the source that's claiming that these red lines are to prevent sword fights also claims that there's purple ribbon loops by the coat hangers in the cloakroom to hang your sword. | ||
|
pmh
1416 Posts
"I'm confident that what he's looking for now is for May's deal to be off the table so he can officially support a second referendum when it's either that or no-deal. As long as a deal is possible he can not support a second referendum. We'll see once May's deal is voted down." This seems plausible. In wich case May has played it pretty smart. Leaving corbyn for now in a position where he has no good options by keeping the option for a deal on the table for as long as possible. And when its the eleventh hour and panic really starts to hit,then maybe its to late for corbyn to make a meaningful impact. | ||
KwarK
United States44203 Posts
| ||
|
Longshank
1648 Posts
On December 22 2018 10:09 KwarK wrote: Corbyn is Old Labour, not New Labour. Foot, not Blair. They’re not the same, you can’t just say left wing = remain. After all, it’s been Tories who took us into Europe. Thatcher and Major. The EU in the UK has been a right wing project that was vehemently opposed by the left. I believe that was the case in most EU countries but the position of leaving the union has changed with time. While they vehemently oppose certain aspects of the EU, they are strongly in favor of other, such as more universal workers rights and whatnot. Many left wing parties across Europe don't want to leave the EU in a Brexit kind of way but rather reform or replace it long-term. And from what I've seen from Corbyn, he seems to mirror that view. It's unfortunate that it's impossible to hold a nuanced view on a matter in today's climate. It's either black or white, pro or anti, and there's no room for anything in between. | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On December 22 2018 17:15 Longshank wrote: I believe that was the case in most EU countries but the position of leaving the union has changed with time. While they vehemently oppose certain aspects of the EU, they are strongly in favor of other, such as more universal workers rights and whatnot. Many left wing parties across Europe don't want to leave the EU in a Brexit kind of way but rather reform or replace it long-term. And from what I've seen from Corbyn, he seems to mirror that view. It's unfortunate that it's impossible to hold a nuanced view on a matter in today's climate. It's either black or white, pro or anti, and there's no room for anything in between. Corbyn's always towed the 'will of the people' line May's used. He's been an open skeptic of the EU for ages and spent the entirety of the actual Brexit campaign being quiet and when the press badgered him gave very neutral comments. He very clearly either doesn't care or only mildly wants to stay in the EU. | ||
| ||
