tzijlstra Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 The Nazis were a democratic party Well, that is the argument done and over with. Have a bit of a read on how democratic the Nazis were. No wonder your argument is so unbalanced and naive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runningman1 Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Silly man, in the first paragraph it talks about how hitler got to 0wer through a series of democratic elections. Did you not read the link? You are defending a party that murdered millions of Muslims for no other reason than they are different and too weak to stop us stealing their wealth. Let's just agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Silly man, in the first paragraph it talks about how hitler got to 0wer through a series of democratic elections. Did you not read the link? You are defending a party that murdered millions of Muslims for no other reason than they are different and too weak to stop us stealing their wealth. Let's just agree to disagree. There was nothing democratic about how the Nazis operated once elected, and very little about how they (he) got to power in the first place. you are comparing apples and pears and concluding that they are both fruits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Heath Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 The point is, it isn't a trifle inflammatory, it is entirely intended to be inflammatory. I will never support the Labour party, but to accuse the entire party of genocide because of the actions of Blair is wholly ignorant. I see your point, but remember people like Robyn Cooke and others who resigned high office in protest against their governments actions told their colleagues of the paucity of Blairs statements. They decided to back Blair, they are, in my opinion culpable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Well said. The Labour party, as I keep trying to tell the middle class socialists on this forum, have long ceased setting policy for the benefit of the "working class". It's now all about the states' client class: those on benefits or employed in the public sector. If only the well-intentioned middle-class supporters understood that their support for Labour actually hurts the people they desire to help... To be fair they might be looking at the alternative and voting for what they think hurts people less. Your point is perfectly valid though. You aren't the only one wondering what the point of Labour is these days. IMO they sold their soul down the river 20 years ago and it's taken a lot of people a lot of time to realise what has happened ---------- Post added 13-04-2016 at 19:00 ---------- I agree whole heartedly, and I am also surprised others can't see it. However I'm not sure if the Establishment hasn't been superseeded by the major Corporations, some of which are wealthier, and therefore more powerful than some countries. It's funny because the other day I read an article which called out Owen Jones for criticising the establishment when he himself is part of the establishment. Didnt ponder it too deeply just thought to myself yes he is because it's basically true. Only when I read the post above did it really hit home that I now think of the Tories, LibDems and Labour as essentially the same thing. I haven't got more radical, more lefty, as I got older. If anything I've mellowed and become much less militant. It's just the space that the main parties occupy has shifted so far right I can't identify with any of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 I see your point, but remember people like Robyn Cooke and others who resigned high office in protest against their governments actions told their colleagues of the paucity of Blairs statements. They decided to back Blair, they are, in my opinion culpable. The Labour party is not the sum of their MPs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilldig Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 Blair's lies were very convincing. I for one was taken in. Shame on me. I won't believe another labour leader for a long time. I too was taken in by his lies but not with the WMD. I just knew it was fiction as did every member of my family and friends. ---------- Post added 14-04-2016 at 10:25 ---------- Yup. No idea why supposedly intelligent people fail to grasp that. I'd go as far as to say that the Tories are now much more the party of the working person than Labour. And that's not an endorsement of the Tories. I would also second that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now