Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,325
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Mar 9, 2018 16:28:10 GMT
Imagine thinking that Lega are anything other than a particularly nasty part of the political establishment.
|
|
|
Post by Antiochian on Mar 9, 2018 17:06:41 GMT
Imagine thinking that Lega are anything other than a particularly nasty part of the political establishment. Because the Italian Establishment have a secret anti-Euro and pro-Putin persona???
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,325
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Mar 9, 2018 18:58:24 GMT
You haven't got a clue have you? The Lega have been in government on a regular basis since the mid 90s and though a little wild at first are thoroughly domesticated now. A few days before the election Salvini was secretly recorded freaking out about internal polls showing (accurately) the PD vote in the South cratering completely to the exclusive benefit of MS5.
|
|
|
Post by Antiochian on Mar 9, 2018 19:05:25 GMT
You haven't got a clue have you? The Lega have been in government on a regular basis since the mid 90s and though a little wild at first are thoroughly domesticated now. A few days before the election Salvini was secretly recorded freaking out about internal polls showing (accurately) the PD vote in the South cratering completely to the exclusive benefit of MS5. So? Point being? That MS5 don't know this? It's a new day in Italian politics...
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,325
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Mar 9, 2018 20:02:18 GMT
My point is that the Lega are every bit as much a part of the political establishment as the PD or Forza Italia. They have a backlash background,* but they're very much a party of government. Salvini's personal political style is not even particularly different to Renzi's (and both are modifications of a style developed by Craxi), though he peddles overt nationalism rather than vague waffle about reform. It is not 1990 anymore - it is a long time since Italian politics was dominated by sober men with the manner and dress sense of the average provincial undertaker.
*But then as the PD is the legal successor to the Communist Party, why should that mean anything?
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 9, 2018 21:32:29 GMT
Because "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" rarely ends well. Tell that to Anna Soubry, Kier Starmer and Vince Cable... Frankly I doubt any of us could tell those three anything at all.
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Mar 11, 2018 10:57:15 GMT
Not so, Georg. A very close friend of mine (a staunch reactionary herself) knows him from university and says he's one of the sharpest minds she's ever met. She says he's actually capable of thinking for himself and of reasoning, something which can't be said of 95% of the general populace. It's just a shame that he's also an ideologue, and one who has nailed his colours to the wrong mast to boot, but then I suppose it's not easy to leave your family's history behind you, especially in Spain. "A woman can be a staunch Conservative or Liberal or Progressive, but never a Reactionary." "The intellect of a marxist petrifies in time, that of a LeftWinger becomes muddy." (GOMEZ DAVILA) “My convictions are the same as those of an old woman praying in the corner of a church.” (NGD)
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Mar 11, 2018 11:02:01 GMT
When political parties are filed under the category of criminal organisations by you, I'm not sure I do - no. Personally I take the view that arbitrarily deeming organisations to be criminal and then prosecuting them is pretty authoritarian. No, it’s positively North Korean. What have say, the Wessex Regionalists ever done that is criminal? At least thetop would just be locking the right wingers up. Every decision on these matters is arbitrarily, every single one. You always make a judgement on the basis of certain assumptions, values, viewpoints and positions, and that is indeed the way laws are made.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2018 11:16:04 GMT
Personally I take the view that arbitrarily deeming organisations to be criminal and then prosecuting them is pretty authoritarian. No, it’s positively North Korean. What have say, the Wessex Regionalists ever done that is criminal? At least thetop would just be locking the right wingers up. Every decision on these matters is arbitrarily, every single one. You always make a judgement on the basis of certain assumptions, values, viewpoints and positions, and that is indeed the way laws are made. Even if it’s opinion, what is it in your opinion that makes the Wessex regionalists criminal?
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,205
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 11, 2018 16:01:59 GMT
My point is that the Lega are every bit as much a part of the political establishment as the PD or Forza Italia. They have a backlash background,* but they're very much a party of government. Salvini's personal political style is not even particularly different to Renzi's (and both are modifications of a style developed by Craxi), though he peddles overt nationalism rather than vague waffle about reform. It is not 1990 anymore - it is a long time since Italian politics was dominated by sober men with the manner and dress sense of the average provincial undertaker. *But then as the PD is the legal successor to the Communist Party, why should that mean anything?Its easy to forget that Italian politics gave us Mussolini and while you wouldnt find much open love for Hitler in Germany, the di Canio incident displayed the continuing nostalgia for Mussolini in Italy. I suppose its linked to a vision of a competent and strong leader which is certainly still part of Italian folk history on the right. Having a party like Lega as part of the mainstream is a logical extension of this. So is Berlusconi. So was Craxi and he was supposedly of the left. The mainstream isn't really very mainstream.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 11, 2018 17:28:33 GMT
My point is that the Lega are every bit as much a part of the political establishment as the PD or Forza Italia. They have a backlash background,* but they're very much a party of government. Salvini's personal political style is not even particularly different to Renzi's (and both are modifications of a style developed by Craxi), though he peddles overt nationalism rather than vague waffle about reform. It is not 1990 anymore - it is a long time since Italian politics was dominated by sober men with the manner and dress sense of the average provincial undertaker. *But then as the PD is the legal successor to the Communist Party, why should that mean anything?Its easy to forget that Italian politics gave us Mussolini and while you wouldnt find much open love for Hitler in Germany, the di Canio incident displayed the continuing nostalgia for Mussolini in Italy. I suppose its linked to a vision of a competent and strong leader which is certainly still part of Italian folk history on the right. Having a party like Lega as part of the mainstream is a logical extension of this. So is Berlusconi. So was Craxi and he was supposedly of the left. The mainstream isn't really very mainstream. Mussolini was expelled from the Italian Socialist Party for his support of Italian involvement in the First World War, having previously opposed it. He had moved to Switzerland to avoid military service, then returned and edited the Socialist journal "Avanti!".
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Mar 11, 2018 19:14:50 GMT
Every decision on these matters is arbitrarily, every single one. You always make a judgement on the basis of certain assumptions, values, viewpoints and positions, and that is indeed the way laws are made. Even if it’s opinion, what is it in your opinion that makes the Wessex regionalists criminal? OK then - and I'll only do this once as tbf this really is an awful waste of time as we're discussing purely hypothetical matters. Frankly there's no way we'll ever see a Pastelito government so the question won't arise in the real world. And if it ever did, Mr Pastelito would of course appoint an independent panel to come up with a proposal for a new Criminal Organisations Bill. And as I said on the forum defections thread: Now for the Wessex regionalists: Evidence (i.e. them having founded a party) suggests there's criminal intent, but as far as I know they have neither received nor wasted any taxpayers' money, they haven't had the opportunity to install their own to manipulate the levers of power, and they haven't as of yet done any other damage. They're the Criminal Organisations equivalent of hippies growing their own weed for personal use only. Two weeks community service will do.
|
|
|
Post by uhurasmazda on Mar 11, 2018 21:37:13 GMT
Even if it’s opinion, what is it in your opinion that makes the Wessex regionalists criminal? OK then - and I'll only do this once as tbf this really is an awful waste of time as we're discussing purely hypothetical matters. Frankly there's no way we'll ever see a Pastelito government so the question won't arise in the real world. And if it ever did, Mr Pastelito would of course appoint an independent panel to come up with a proposal for a new Criminal Organisations Bill. And as I said on the forum defections thread: Now for the Wessex regionalists: Evidence (i.e. them having founded a party) suggests there's criminal intent, but as far as I know they have neither received nor wasted any taxpayers' money, they haven't had the opportunity to install their own to manipulate the levers of power, and they haven't as of yet done any other damage. They're the Criminal Organisations equivalent of hippies growing their own weed for personal use only. Two weeks community service will do. If receiving public money is tantamount to criminality, presumably the NHS, schools, Army, unemployed people and museums will also be arraigned under this law. Seems a little bit dystopian to me. Also, if you think politics can possibly work without funding, I've got a bridge to sell you. Politicians, even Independent ones, need to be funded in order to employ people to deal with casework, write speeches, research issues and make policy. If they tried to do that all themselves, they wouldn't sleep for five years and they'd do a crap job of all of it. The way public funding works in NZ means that while Labour were in Opposition, we didn't have enough money to employ enough good people to do enough research to make good policy, which is why we had a mad rush once we actually got into Government and were able to use the civil service to actually iron out the details of our policies. Without public funding of parties, you'd have a load of over-tired MPs having crap ideas and ruining people's lives by turning those ideas into law. But anyway, Italy. One of the more amusing results involved More Europe running independently of PD in the overseas constituencies - obviously they nabbed a single seat in Europe, but they also topped the poll among the few dozen Italian expats in Myanmar.
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Mar 11, 2018 22:17:22 GMT
Also, if you think politics can possibly work without funding, I've got a bridge to sell you. Politicians, even Independent ones, need to be funded in order to employ people to deal with casework, write speeches, research issues and make policy. If they tried to do that all themselves, they wouldn't sleep for five years and they'd do a crap job of all of it. The way public funding works in NZ means that while Labour were in Opposition, we didn't have enough money to employ enough good people to do enough research to make good policy, which is why we had a mad rush once we actually got into Government and were able to use the civil service to actually iron out the details of our policies. Without public funding of parties, you'd have a load of over-tired MPs having crap ideas and ruining people's lives by turning those ideas into law. Further evidence that all you party political people are just unable to think outside that party political box. You don't even want to think outside your box. Where did I say individual, independent politicians shouldn't be funded? I only said parties shouldn't be funded.
|
|
|
Post by uhurasmazda on Mar 11, 2018 22:27:02 GMT
Also, if you think politics can possibly work without funding, I've got a bridge to sell you. Politicians, even Independent ones, need to be funded in order to employ people to deal with casework, write speeches, research issues and make policy. If they tried to do that all themselves, they wouldn't sleep for five years and they'd do a crap job of all of it. The way public funding works in NZ means that while Labour were in Opposition, we didn't have enough money to employ enough good people to do enough research to make good policy, which is why we had a mad rush once we actually got into Government and were able to use the civil service to actually iron out the details of our policies. Without public funding of parties, you'd have a load of over-tired MPs having crap ideas and ruining people's lives by turning those ideas into law. Further evidence that all you party political people are just unable to think outside that party political box. You don't even want to think outside your box. Where did I say individual, independent politicians shouldn't be funded? I only said parties shouldn't be funded. But - but you said that the reason parties are criminal organisations is that they receive public funding. This is very confusing.
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Mar 11, 2018 22:29:39 GMT
Further evidence that all you party political people are just unable to think outside that party political box. You don't even want to think outside your box. Where did I say individual, independent politicians shouldn't be funded? I only said parties shouldn't be funded. But - but you said that the reason parties are criminal organisations is that they receive public funding. This is very confusing. They receive funding as parties. What's so confusing?
|
|
|
Post by uhurasmazda on Mar 11, 2018 23:43:56 GMT
But - but you said that the reason parties are criminal organisations is that they receive public funding. This is very confusing. They receive funding as parties. What's so confusing? So parties are criminal because... they are parties?
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 11, 2018 23:51:53 GMT
They receive funding as parties. What's so confusing? So parties are criminal because... they are parties? Please, for the love of the little baby Jesus, can we stop this one now..
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Mar 12, 2018 0:45:36 GMT
No, I want to know exactly what criminal intent is meant by setting up a party? What are they intending?
This is fascinating- I love looking into other people's minds.
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Mar 13, 2018 12:00:28 GMT
No, I want to know exactly what criminal intent is meant by setting up a party? What are they intending? This is fascinating- I love looking into other people's minds. I'm afraid the love of the little baby Jesus made me temper my rage against the collectivist disease.
|
|