The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
It’s about that time of the year when the weather gets duller. The skies become greyer with each passing hour, the leaves have long since stopped being a myriad of colours, and chill winds blast icy needles through anyone unfortunate enough to be caught outside. All in all, it seems like the perfect time to talk about politics.
Now, I’m aware as I write this that chances are, not many of you will read it. After all, politics is earthshatteringly dull, and more than a little perverse. Where else would a man who professed admiration for the BNP be considered ‘a bit of a character’? In which other profession could the boss lie through his teeth to the shop floor (i.e. us) and, when caught out, refuse to bring the matter up again? Not very many I’d bet.
But why is it so boring? I mean, whether we like it or not, politics is an important matter. Speaking personally, whenever I write these little bursts of vitriol about the political world, I try and make them as accessible and entertaining is possible as possible (not always easy when talking about something duller than the wits of a US President). And one would have thought that it would be in everyone’s best interests to make sure that every effort is made to include people in debate on something as important as politics. Wouldn’t you?
Apparently it is not. A century ago, people were encouraged to believe that the ‘ruling classes’ knew what was best, and should be left alone to the important business of running the country, whilst the working classes should busy themselves working. This attitude disappeared almost totally in the UK after WWII. We’d seen in the build up to the war just what an utter barrel of monkey’s bumholes the supposed ruling elite had made of seeing which way the wind was blowing (“What’s that old chap? Some Austrian chappy is shouting about how he intends to invade half of Europe? And he’s making lots of weapons you say? Well, I’m sure it’s nothing. Now; who’s for a spot of incest? Incest anyone?”), people started to pay a lot more attention to who it was they gave power to. A 6-year war and revelations like the Holocaust tend to concentrate ones mind, and make one less likely to be blindly and idiotically faithful to the idea that their government will do what is best for everyone.
Then we had the Thatcher years. Now, I do tend to think that she was a strong leader and a rather good one (though with the benefit of hindsight, I do get the impression that given a few more years and she would have started doing things like declaring herself “Dictator for Life”...) for the country at the time. However, she did tend to encourage people not to pay much attention to politics. Hers was a pretty much authoritarian rule, and so people grew apathetic about politics because no matter what they said or did, Thatcher went ahead and did what she wanted. And because it mainly worked out for the best (in the short term certainly), no one really wanted to question her too closely anyway. “So a few thousand miners are out of work, and all our heavy industry got canned? Aye well...it was going to die a death soon anyway and who cares when we’re making SO MUCH MONEY!”
So now we’re back in the situation where we’re gently encouraged to leave the ruling classes alone to get on with running society. Only now, we don’t have the excuse of being ill informed, or ignorant. We’re better informed now as a society than we ever have been before. And, as a result, even someone only casually acquainted with the cavernous headed prats who call themselves our government will be well aware that they are a bunch of shifty, power hungry sh*tcake bakers. We wouldn’t trust these people to look after our house for a weekend, but we don’t really much care about letting them look after our country. Why is this?
It’s not as if those in opposition are any better; the Tory party have just jettisoned their leader (I’m not going to mention him by name; I’m intrigued to know how many people actually know it without being prompted...) in favour of Michael Howard; a man who became a byword for Shiftyness after his interview by Paxman, and who is recognised by the general public as “that smarmy Tory bloke”. Doesn’t encourage faith in them as an alternative government really. The Libdems are...well, they’re there. And nobody seems to care.
So we have a bunch of people jostling for power, none of whom are liked or trusted very much. The only ones who aren’t disliked or considered untrustworthy are the ones whom nobody has really heard of. And so, most people simply don’t bother to choose their leaders. We just leave it to people who still seem to give a damn about politics.
And who are most of these people? They’re the people who will vote for one party because they have done all their life and their parents before them, and so on. They’d vote for Labour if Tony Blair stood up in Parliament, flicked the V’s at the camera’s, then gave a speech on how he intended to solve unemployment by grinding the jobless up in a giant mincing machine and selling the resulting mush to their families. They’d vote Tory if...well, lets face it; anyone who still votes Tory after the pigs ear they made of things in living memory has clearly not bothered to engage their brain since 1990. But you get the picture; the majority of those who vote are those who are rabidly in favour of one side, and seem to believe that their opposition are in league with Satan.
Because of this, politics has polarised. The parties know that they have to appeal to their hard-core base of voters, and it seems that they’ve decided that the best way to do this is to heap scorn on whoever is their opposition (although it does seem that, using that logic, the Tory party’s main opponent is the Tory party...). So now, when one looks at the political arena, one sees what looks very much like a slightly more grownup version of that old playground favourite, “My gang is better than your gang”.
This doesn’t benefit anybody (except perhaps the Sun and the Daily Mail, who like to keep things simple...), and just reinforces the idea that politics should be ignored. But things have been like this for over 20 years now; to new voters, this venal popularity contest between two main parties is the way things have always been. And those people who DO vote are so preoccupied with denouncing whomever is on the other team politically, that they’ve stopped bothering to examine what exactly their own side is getting up to.
So what are we left with? Well, we have a gang of greedy fools supported by mindless idiots on one side...and much the same on the other. Both of these groups are, I would say, in the minority. The overwhelming majority of the public is made up of people who have simply ceased to care what happens in politics any more. They still complain about the government when it affects them personally, but bearing in mind they don’t vote, why should the government give a toss? Answer: They don’t have too. As long as they pander to the minorities who elect them, they can get away with murder (literally in some cases).
So what am I trying to say (other than the same thing that, in a roundabout sort of way, I always say: I’m bored at work)? Basically I think I’m saying that, boring though it is, politics is something we should try to at least take a passing interest in if we actually want to see any improvements in our own lives, and in society as a whole. The alternative is more leaders like Dubya, who doesn’t even need to hide the fact that he’s only in government in order to line his pockets any more as there are idiots out there who would believe him if he said the sky was yellow, black was white, and WOMD will be found in Iraq any day now. Surely we deserve better than that?
Now, I’m aware as I write this that chances are, not many of you will read it. After all, politics is earthshatteringly dull, and more than a little perverse. Where else would a man who professed admiration for the BNP be considered ‘a bit of a character’? In which other profession could the boss lie through his teeth to the shop floor (i.e. us) and, when caught out, refuse to bring the matter up again? Not very many I’d bet.
But why is it so boring? I mean, whether we like it or not, politics is an important matter. Speaking personally, whenever I write these little bursts of vitriol about the political world, I try and make them as accessible and entertaining is possible as possible (not always easy when talking about something duller than the wits of a US President). And one would have thought that it would be in everyone’s best interests to make sure that every effort is made to include people in debate on something as important as politics. Wouldn’t you?
Apparently it is not. A century ago, people were encouraged to believe that the ‘ruling classes’ knew what was best, and should be left alone to the important business of running the country, whilst the working classes should busy themselves working. This attitude disappeared almost totally in the UK after WWII. We’d seen in the build up to the war just what an utter barrel of monkey’s bumholes the supposed ruling elite had made of seeing which way the wind was blowing (“What’s that old chap? Some Austrian chappy is shouting about how he intends to invade half of Europe? And he’s making lots of weapons you say? Well, I’m sure it’s nothing. Now; who’s for a spot of incest? Incest anyone?”), people started to pay a lot more attention to who it was they gave power to. A 6-year war and revelations like the Holocaust tend to concentrate ones mind, and make one less likely to be blindly and idiotically faithful to the idea that their government will do what is best for everyone.
Then we had the Thatcher years. Now, I do tend to think that she was a strong leader and a rather good one (though with the benefit of hindsight, I do get the impression that given a few more years and she would have started doing things like declaring herself “Dictator for Life”...) for the country at the time. However, she did tend to encourage people not to pay much attention to politics. Hers was a pretty much authoritarian rule, and so people grew apathetic about politics because no matter what they said or did, Thatcher went ahead and did what she wanted. And because it mainly worked out for the best (in the short term certainly), no one really wanted to question her too closely anyway. “So a few thousand miners are out of work, and all our heavy industry got canned? Aye well...it was going to die a death soon anyway and who cares when we’re making SO MUCH MONEY!”
So now we’re back in the situation where we’re gently encouraged to leave the ruling classes alone to get on with running society. Only now, we don’t have the excuse of being ill informed, or ignorant. We’re better informed now as a society than we ever have been before. And, as a result, even someone only casually acquainted with the cavernous headed prats who call themselves our government will be well aware that they are a bunch of shifty, power hungry sh*tcake bakers. We wouldn’t trust these people to look after our house for a weekend, but we don’t really much care about letting them look after our country. Why is this?
It’s not as if those in opposition are any better; the Tory party have just jettisoned their leader (I’m not going to mention him by name; I’m intrigued to know how many people actually know it without being prompted...) in favour of Michael Howard; a man who became a byword for Shiftyness after his interview by Paxman, and who is recognised by the general public as “that smarmy Tory bloke”. Doesn’t encourage faith in them as an alternative government really. The Libdems are...well, they’re there. And nobody seems to care.
So we have a bunch of people jostling for power, none of whom are liked or trusted very much. The only ones who aren’t disliked or considered untrustworthy are the ones whom nobody has really heard of. And so, most people simply don’t bother to choose their leaders. We just leave it to people who still seem to give a damn about politics.
And who are most of these people? They’re the people who will vote for one party because they have done all their life and their parents before them, and so on. They’d vote for Labour if Tony Blair stood up in Parliament, flicked the V’s at the camera’s, then gave a speech on how he intended to solve unemployment by grinding the jobless up in a giant mincing machine and selling the resulting mush to their families. They’d vote Tory if...well, lets face it; anyone who still votes Tory after the pigs ear they made of things in living memory has clearly not bothered to engage their brain since 1990. But you get the picture; the majority of those who vote are those who are rabidly in favour of one side, and seem to believe that their opposition are in league with Satan.
Because of this, politics has polarised. The parties know that they have to appeal to their hard-core base of voters, and it seems that they’ve decided that the best way to do this is to heap scorn on whoever is their opposition (although it does seem that, using that logic, the Tory party’s main opponent is the Tory party...). So now, when one looks at the political arena, one sees what looks very much like a slightly more grownup version of that old playground favourite, “My gang is better than your gang”.
This doesn’t benefit anybody (except perhaps the Sun and the Daily Mail, who like to keep things simple...), and just reinforces the idea that politics should be ignored. But things have been like this for over 20 years now; to new voters, this venal popularity contest between two main parties is the way things have always been. And those people who DO vote are so preoccupied with denouncing whomever is on the other team politically, that they’ve stopped bothering to examine what exactly their own side is getting up to.
So what are we left with? Well, we have a gang of greedy fools supported by mindless idiots on one side...and much the same on the other. Both of these groups are, I would say, in the minority. The overwhelming majority of the public is made up of people who have simply ceased to care what happens in politics any more. They still complain about the government when it affects them personally, but bearing in mind they don’t vote, why should the government give a toss? Answer: They don’t have too. As long as they pander to the minorities who elect them, they can get away with murder (literally in some cases).
So what am I trying to say (other than the same thing that, in a roundabout sort of way, I always say: I’m bored at work)? Basically I think I’m saying that, boring though it is, politics is something we should try to at least take a passing interest in if we actually want to see any improvements in our own lives, and in society as a whole. The alternative is more leaders like Dubya, who doesn’t even need to hide the fact that he’s only in government in order to line his pockets any more as there are idiots out there who would believe him if he said the sky was yellow, black was white, and WOMD will be found in Iraq any day now. Surely we deserve better than that?
Page:
Blank wrote:
> And surely you "no" how to spell?
*listens to the loud WHACK as Blank walked into that one*
> And surely you "no" how to spell?
*listens to the loud WHACK as Blank walked into that one*
And surely you "no" how to spell?
Belly No Balls ? You do no the swear filter is their to be defeeted ?
*waits*
*waits*
Belldandy wrote:
> Wow. You believed that as well ? It is like you cannot tell when
> someone it taking the wee.
BWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!
Have I got this right? Bell, the man who couldn't recognise a joke if he was given a Joke Recognition Manual with the page open on the chapter entitled "This is a joke", is trying to belittle someone else for missing a funny?! And he does it in response to my making a joke at his own expense?
AAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!
~wipes a tear of mirth away~
Mate, if it wasn't you making the comment, I wouldn't laugh so much. And if I took myself as seriously as you do, I'd doubtless be fighting off the beginning stages of an epic strop. Unfortunately, you're the man who DEMANDED IB be banned for...well, making a joke and taking the proverbial. So you see, right there, how you sound even more like a...well, like a man who wants to distract attention from how much of an ass he made himself look in the early stages of this thread at best, or a pretty mindless troll who can be entirely discounted at worst. Which is it, oh little Belly No Balls?
> Wow. You believed that as well ? It is like you cannot tell when
> someone it taking the wee.
BWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!
Have I got this right? Bell, the man who couldn't recognise a joke if he was given a Joke Recognition Manual with the page open on the chapter entitled "This is a joke", is trying to belittle someone else for missing a funny?! And he does it in response to my making a joke at his own expense?
AAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!
~wipes a tear of mirth away~
Mate, if it wasn't you making the comment, I wouldn't laugh so much. And if I took myself as seriously as you do, I'd doubtless be fighting off the beginning stages of an epic strop. Unfortunately, you're the man who DEMANDED IB be banned for...well, making a joke and taking the proverbial. So you see, right there, how you sound even more like a...well, like a man who wants to distract attention from how much of an ass he made himself look in the early stages of this thread at best, or a pretty mindless troll who can be entirely discounted at worst. Which is it, oh little Belly No Balls?
Light wrote:
> Man...you keep count of how many times I make you look a fool? Now
> THAT is obsessive...
Wow. You believed that as well ? It is like you cannot tell when someone it taking the wee.
> Man...you keep count of how many times I make you look a fool? Now
> THAT is obsessive...
Wow. You believed that as well ? It is like you cannot tell when someone it taking the wee.
Belldandy wrote:
> Now to check the abortion topic to see if we can make that 9 a 10, oh
> yes...
Man...you keep count of how many times I make you look a fool? Now THAT is obsessive...
> Now to check the abortion topic to see if we can make that 9 a 10, oh
> yes...
Man...you keep count of how many times I make you look a fool? Now THAT is obsessive...
Now to check the abortion topic to see if we can make that 9 a 10, oh yes...
Score!
Another "HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!1111!!"
That's, ooh, 9 this week ?
Another "HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!1111!!"
That's, ooh, 9 this week ?
Belldandy wrote:
> Strafex wrote:
> The thing is, like Light said, it's all about winning acclaim and
> getting into power nowdays. That's why they'll ignore good idea's
> JUST because the opposition comes up with.
>
> Which is my point.
Bwah ha ha ha haaaaa! So you miss the point, argue with me...then say that YOU were saying what I was saying?! AAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA! Hey Bell, wasn't it you saying that I was talking rubbish earlier on in this thread? Do you think people can't just scroll down and see that you're lying through your teeth when you try and say "Which is my point."?
>
> Light has not stumbled across some secret truth or anything new,
> politics has always been about winning acclaim (i.e to get people to
> vote for you) and getting into power (to actually do something
> because you can't do jack without the power).
Errr....did I ever claim to have done so? No...no, I think I just claimed to be giving my opinion. Hmm...funny that.
>
> It is not as simple as "if we used everyone's good ideas it'd be
> a great world" because each party stands for certain values and
> beliefs and it is rare that an opposing party's ideas match those, if
> they did then that party would not be what it was, and come to think
> of it how does one define a "good" idea anyway?
Anything that you haven't thought of...
And you've missed the point again; I was saying that we should THINK ABOUT THE IDEAS WE DO HAVE (you know; like I keep saying to you over and over, and you keep ignoring it?) so that we know what it is we're voting for. Tool.
>
> The one problem all the alternative ideas to current policies have is
> that they've never actually been tried, contact with reality almost
> always sends most policies off course. I mean, on paper communism
> worked, in reality you ended up with Russia.
True enough. So we should just never change? Spoken like a true Tory (note: as you have a lack of humour, I should point out that I was baiting you for humerous effect with that sentence. Just so you know.)
>
> But, even if a new party formed, how would they be any different to
> any other, because they'd want power (to bring in policy changes) and
> want acclaim (to win), and they'd attack the other parties policies
> and politicians just the same as the existing ones, and people would
> disagree with them just the same because no party can please
> everyone.
>
> The only way to move away from it is to have a dictatorship, which is
> far worse than what we have now, possibly.
*L* Yeah, that's right; it's the ONLY way. What a...look, if you actually thought about it you'd see that I'm suggesting amending our current system to make it more inclusive. Like in Australia, where voting is compulsory. Do you see? But no, you have to come up with an extreme alternative... no wonder you're rarely taken seriously.
> Strafex wrote:
> The thing is, like Light said, it's all about winning acclaim and
> getting into power nowdays. That's why they'll ignore good idea's
> JUST because the opposition comes up with.
>
> Which is my point.
Bwah ha ha ha haaaaa! So you miss the point, argue with me...then say that YOU were saying what I was saying?! AAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA! Hey Bell, wasn't it you saying that I was talking rubbish earlier on in this thread? Do you think people can't just scroll down and see that you're lying through your teeth when you try and say "Which is my point."?
>
> Light has not stumbled across some secret truth or anything new,
> politics has always been about winning acclaim (i.e to get people to
> vote for you) and getting into power (to actually do something
> because you can't do jack without the power).
Errr....did I ever claim to have done so? No...no, I think I just claimed to be giving my opinion. Hmm...funny that.
>
> It is not as simple as "if we used everyone's good ideas it'd be
> a great world" because each party stands for certain values and
> beliefs and it is rare that an opposing party's ideas match those, if
> they did then that party would not be what it was, and come to think
> of it how does one define a "good" idea anyway?
Anything that you haven't thought of...
And you've missed the point again; I was saying that we should THINK ABOUT THE IDEAS WE DO HAVE (you know; like I keep saying to you over and over, and you keep ignoring it?) so that we know what it is we're voting for. Tool.
>
> The one problem all the alternative ideas to current policies have is
> that they've never actually been tried, contact with reality almost
> always sends most policies off course. I mean, on paper communism
> worked, in reality you ended up with Russia.
True enough. So we should just never change? Spoken like a true Tory (note: as you have a lack of humour, I should point out that I was baiting you for humerous effect with that sentence. Just so you know.)
>
> But, even if a new party formed, how would they be any different to
> any other, because they'd want power (to bring in policy changes) and
> want acclaim (to win), and they'd attack the other parties policies
> and politicians just the same as the existing ones, and people would
> disagree with them just the same because no party can please
> everyone.
>
> The only way to move away from it is to have a dictatorship, which is
> far worse than what we have now, possibly.
*L* Yeah, that's right; it's the ONLY way. What a...look, if you actually thought about it you'd see that I'm suggesting amending our current system to make it more inclusive. Like in Australia, where voting is compulsory. Do you see? But no, you have to come up with an extreme alternative... no wonder you're rarely taken seriously.
Belldandy wrote:
> Maybe because this topic is going nowhere other than the usual spat?
> Still nice to see you adopting the hardline criminal punishment
> mentality, we'll make you a conservative yet !
*L* Aaah, the lack of a sense of humour. I was a conservative, remember? Then I started using my brain instead of trotting out reactionary slogans that my parents taught me...
>
> And you're still funny :D
And you're still avoiding addressing the topic, and missing the point. For a change.
> Maybe because this topic is going nowhere other than the usual spat?
> Still nice to see you adopting the hardline criminal punishment
> mentality, we'll make you a conservative yet !
*L* Aaah, the lack of a sense of humour. I was a conservative, remember? Then I started using my brain instead of trotting out reactionary slogans that my parents taught me...
>
> And you're still funny :D
And you're still avoiding addressing the topic, and missing the point. For a change.
Page: