Favourite political websites

Former Member

I thought it might be interesting if we shared some of our favourite political / news websites. Sometimes I fall into the trap of looking for and reading stuff which I know I'm gonna agree with, which only reinforces my prejudices, and I don't learn anything new. So maybe you can all broaden my mind by putting me onto some good sites. Here are some of the sites I'm enjoying at the moment...
http://www.theecologist.org
http://www.monbiot.com
http://www.la-articles.org.uk
http://www.thebirdman.org
http://www.antiwar.com
http://www.neoconswatch.blogspot.com
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com
http://www.thirdway.org
http://www.libertarian.co.uk

Former Member

Re: Favourite political websites

Originally posted by nckdn

http://www.thirdway.org

That figures. I thought you might be one of that lot.

Fash cunt.

Former Member

Blagsta, have you read their manifesto? Considering they support legalisation of cannabis, an end to international debt for developing nations (thereby alleviating much of the economic immigration that would otherwise be unnecessary), and an end for UK support for unmitigated US military/corporate hegemony and warmongering, they are anything but Fascist.

Methinks you apply that moniker too offhandedly without examining what they purport to truly represent. I myself am pleasantly intrigued by their stand on various issues, having actually not heard of them prior to this thread.

Former Member

Errrr..they are fash. Trust me. Set up by Patrick Harrington, ex National Front.

Former Member

Third Way, which was founded in 1990 by the front's former chairman and vice-chairman, claims to reject "racism and the politics of hate". But it believes that cultures should, for their own good, be kept apart, and defended from "mass immigration". Globalisation, the splinter group claims, "reduces us to a rootless, transient population disconnected from its history", precipitating ecological crisis and encouraging migration. According to Searchlight magazine, the party's chairman, Patrick Harrington, has stayed in touch with the far right Italian terrorists Massimo Morsello and Roberto Fiore. He has also made contact with the black separatist Nation of Islam and orthodox Jews pursuing "separate development". Third Way, like many far-right groups, has abandoned overt racist aggression in favour of cultural isolation.

Much of the intellectual work underpinning Third Way's policies has been conducted by a Dr Aidan Rankin. The position statement he wrote for the group blames indigenous people's loss of land and sovereignty partly on corporations and brutal governments, but also on "leftwing cultural prejudice", feminism, human rights and the politics of "tolerance" and "inclusion". Oddly conflating it with assimilation, Rankin sees multiculturalism as a globalising force which forbids tribal people to lead their own, culturally pristine lives. He then goes on to suggest that "we are all indigenous peoples now", our "voices... silenced, our language castrated" by "political correctness" and gender equality. Nick Griffin of the BNP takes this analysis a small step further when he claims to be defending the "endangered white tribes of the first world". It should be a cause of grave concern to everyone in the green movement that Dr Aidan Rankin was, until very recently, the comment editor of Britain's leading environmental magazine, the Ecologist.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/role/globdem/globgov/2002/0430steal.htm

Former Member

I see. Well, their manifesto seems to adopt a much more Green-oriented position on nearly every issue. Could be that Mr. Harrington is ex NF for a reason? Namely a reversal in his prior stance on issues?

Or perhaps the party has grown beyond any narrow perspective which Mr. Harrington, as a lone individual, might be capable of imposing upon it?

Former Member

The far right have always had an "ecological" position. Fatherland, leibensraum, all that crap. Trust me, they are fascist.

Former Member

Eco-fascism also has a lengthy lineage in Britain. The Soil Association, Britain's organic lobbyists, counted amongst their earliest members Jorian Jenks, former agriculture advisor to the British Union of Fascists. AK Chesterton, first Chairman of the National Front, was closely linked to far-right environmentalism of the 1930s. His uncle GK, Catholic apologist and purveyor of the Father Brown stories, invented the ideology of Distributism with Hillaire Belloc. Distributism, proclaiming the principle of 'three acres and a cow', seen as a 'third way' between capitalism and communism, drifted into the anti-semitic sphere before becoming the inspiration behind the modern remnants of the Front. Issues of Distributist newsletters in the 1950s advertised support for car free cities, decentralisation, the racist League of British Loyalists and Rudolf Hess.

http://www.redpepper.org.uk/cularch/xdkgreen.html

Former Member

Obviously you posted the follow-up whilst I was writing my post above.

Taking your citation into account, I can acknowledge that certainly more scrutiny would be required to arrive at any objective assessment of their actual positions on the issues. Nevertheless (and whilst on many issues I do concur with the analyses put forth by globalpolicy.org), I am inclined to suspect a certain degree of subscription to the present status quo of western (especially US) corporate hegemony over the international political arena in terms both political and economic.

Without having delved into the why's and whatfor's of this particular party, I do detect a degree of unfair oversimplification on the part of the author of that piece.

Villifying positions - which call for a move away from the perennial cycle of debt as well as cultural and resource exploitation for profit over the developing world, which comprises the core of our long running (and ultimately unsustainable) corporate driven and corporate serving system - as simply cultural isolationism is far too intellectually dishonest and reactionistic an approach.

Perhaps after more careful study I might find, indeed, that The Third Way's positions are more akin to those of Mr. Giffin and the BNP, however (in fairness) I simply do not get that sense from my reading of the posted manifesto.

Former Member

Blag, what I am trying to get you to do here is to weigh the positions in light of long recognised global realities and inevitabilities, not simply throw out other people's opinions as if they are the end all and be all of the debate. You do yourself no credit by simply cutting and pasting without any demonstrable effort on your own part to weigh these positions against considerations of the direction in which the status quo is leading the world.

Former Member

Originally posted by Clandestine
Blag, what I am trying to get you to do here is to weigh the positions in light of long recognised global realities and inevitabilities, not simply throw out other people's opinions as if they are the end all and be all of the debate. You do yourself no credit by simply cutting and pasting without any demonstrable effort on your own part to weigh these positions against considerations of the direction in which the status quo is leading the world.

I bow to you.

Former Member

Blag, neither the concept of Fatherland nor that of Liebensraum are remotely "ecological" policy positions in any way shape or form. Fatherland is merely a slogan of hyper nationalism and liebensraum was nothing more than an equally onerous slogan, like the WoT, behind which lay the self justification of the Nazis for waging war of colonialist expansion.

Insofar as war is perhaps the least ecological act any government could perpetrate, I fear you are simply throwing out non-sequitors as a means of simply dismissing the points raised in the Third Way's manifesto (which itself is quite in tune with the views expressed by most anti-globalist advocates).

Former Member

Originally posted by lukesh
www.conservatives.com
www.thesun.co.uk
www.georgebush.com

Do you ever check the opposition to see what they're saying Luke?

And by the way, the inclusion of The S*n as a political website is a tad optimistic mate.

I check the Telegraph every day as well as BBC News, the Guardian and occasionally the Independent, the Scum and the Mirror.

Former Member

Trust me, they're fascist. Ask any anti-fascist. Look it up, its a matter of record.

Former Member

Touche!

Well I'm impressed Luke! You certainly seem to be sharpening you sense of sarcasm. I fell for it.

So what websites do you check, if any?

Former Member

www.dr.dk
www.guardian.co.uk
www.haaretzdaily.com
www.ynet.co.il
news.bbc.co.uk

Former Member

Re: Re: Favourite political websites

Originally posted by Blagsta
That figures. I thought you might be one of that lot.

Fash cunt.

May I point out that nckdn was listing sites that he doesn't necessarily agree with, seeing as the list included monbiot.com you can't conclude that even if these guys are fascists that nckdn agrees with them, that was the point he made in the first place......

Former Member

Yeah OK, maybe I'm overreacting. But nckdn smells a bit dodgy to me. Anyone who's first few posts are about black footballers not being British and posts dodgy polls about immigration, while linking to discredited "scientific racism" sites and sites like Third Way, I'm a bit suspicious of.

Former Member

Look

"The Spaniards were booing players who clearly were not Englishmen"

http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73502

Now that looks like the views of racist nationalist to me.

Former Member

I agree that nckdn has come across a bit dodgy on the race issue, but maybe you have been a bit over the top, ah well, we will see what happens in future therads...........

Former Member

Re: Re: Re: Favourite political websites

Originally posted by Toadborg
May I point out that nckdn was listing sites that he doesn't necessarily agree with, seeing as the list included monbiot.com you can't conclude that even if these guys are fascists that nckdn agrees with them, that was the point he made in the first place......

He quotes from Monbiot in attacking Third Way!

Former Member

The Onion

Former Member

Originally posted by Blagsta
Look

"The Spaniards were booing players who clearly were not Englishmen"

http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73502

Now that looks like the views of racist nationalist to me.

How about it nckdn? Do you think black players are not English?

I know the answer, but I want to hear it from you: straight 'yes' or 'no' please.

Former Member

Originally posted by go_away
The Onion

The Durham Shallot is better;)

BBC News.
Guardian.
The Political Quarterly.
The Age

Former Member

Ecology, nationalism and racism have always been very much intertwined.

Go and look back at the history of the Green Party.

Former Member

Re: Re: Re: Re: Favourite political websites

Originally posted by nckdn
He quotes from Monbiot in attacking Third Way!

So?

Former Member

Re: Favourite political websites

Originally posted by nckdn

http://www.thebirdman.org

This is also a fairly unsavoury anti-semitic and pro racial separatism site.

Former Member

Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
www.dr.dk
www.guardian.co.uk
www.haaretzdaily.com
www.ynet.co.il
news.bbc.co.uk

Thanks JR. It'll do me good to use haaretzdaily as most of the sites I look at share my prejudices about Israel. So I'll hear the other p.o.v. for a while. Good. To be honest I only think of Israel at all, as 'the Palestinian issue', seeing 'normal' news stories made me realise how narrow my viewpoint is. Cheers.

Former Member

Originally posted by Clandestine
Blag, neither the concept of Fatherland nor that of Liebensraum are remotely "ecological" policy positions in any way shape or form. Fatherland is merely a slogan of hyper nationalism and liebensraum was nothing more than an equally onerous slogan, like the WoT, behind which lay the self justification of the Nazis for waging war of colonialist expansion.

Clandestine, (or anyone) what is the WoT?

Duh! Figured it out eventually.

Former Member

Originally posted by Blagsta
Yeah OK, maybe I'm overreacting. But nckdn smells a bit dodgy to me. Anyone who's first few posts are about black footballers not being British and posts dodgy polls about immigration, while linking to discredited "scientific racism" sites and sites like Third Way, I'm a bit suspicious of.

That poll about immigration was dodgy, the choices I offered were crap and provocative, I'm sorry for that.
The English footballers thread should really have been two different ones. 1) Should we have a British team inclusive of all the nationalities and ethnic groups making up the British people? And 2) Who are the English? I'm still puzzled that people don't accept the English are an ethnic group and that BlackArab and his minority ethnic friends say they are English. Mine don't and I think mine are more representative.
The dodgy science and a possible racist motive is, I hope a misunderstanding. The WSJ letter I linked to in the Nick Griffin thread was written by scientists working in the field of IQ and intelligence. It was written in response to the controversy created by 'The Bell Curve', not in support of the conclusions drawn by Herrnstein and Murray from the work that IQ and Intelligence specialists have done. Somebody noted in the thread (somehow thinking it argued against me or my posts) that the 52 scientists do not claim that Blacks are somehow genetically less intelligent than any other groups. Good. I don't think they are either and have never suggested differently. Prof James Flynn of Univ. of Otago is regarded as the best academic debunker of 'Bell Curve' type stuff, as far as I know he's never taken issue with the WSJ letter.
There's a lot of 'Guilty by association' going on here I think.
Third Way and Aidan Rankin and The Ecologist likewise. I'm not Fascist or racist and I'd like to think I'm a lot less dogmatic, intolerant and judgemental than you come across to me on this board Blagsta.

Former Member

What a load of disengenous backtracking bollocks. You have asserted that scientific racism is a fact and that some races are more intelligent than others. You have asserted that the cause of conflict in society is primarily because of conflict between races. Every time it's pointed out to you that your opinions are racist you try and come up with some pathetic excuse. It won't wash - asserting that racial/ethnic conflict is primary is a racist one, a position that the Nazi's adopted.
And no, "English" is not an ethnicity. It is a nationality. If you want to talk about "native" ethnicity or race in England, you might need to mention the Celts. And yes, all the black or asian or otherwise non-white people I know who were born here and live here see themselves as English or at least British and I think my friends are more representative than yours.
Your opinions are racist whether you think they are or not.