moderatecentrist

joined 1 month ago
[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 3 points 1 month ago

Probably beyond my hoodwinking skills. Also I'm not northern myself, I was just wondering what kind of person they would consider to have a "socially appropriate background". Posh accent, wealthy family, and from South East England, I would expect.

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

I saw this:

Your Party should also end Britain’s participation in NATO, she said

And a quote from her here:

Every penny that this Labour government spends on missiles, tanks and bombs is taken out of healthcare, housing, and our future and addressing the climate catastrophe

I think Britain probably should have good defence though, working together with our allies, e.g. in Europe, Japan, Australia, etc. If the UK decided to largely disarm then Russia would probably do whatever they liked to our country very quickly.

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 2 points 1 month ago

I was a manager at Woolworths back in the day, I swear... but this family would probably say my accent isn't posh enough to tutor their child.

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 25 points 1 month ago

The article says the fine has now been cancelled, but originally someone from the council defended the fine by saying:

We are committed to protecting Richmond's waterways and keeping our borough's streets clean and safe.

Pretty ridiculous. Coffee is an organic substance right? Made from roasted coffee beans. I could maybe understand if someone was pouring industrial chemicals into the sewers but coffee surely shouldn't be a problem.

Also of course big water companies get away with dumping sewage into rivers, but a very small amount of coffee apparently needs to be harshly punished. One rule for big business and another rule for common people.

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Interesting. I do think it's a threat if hostile entities own critical pieces of British infrastructure. But I think Russia is also a threat that should be remembered, and jihadis can be a threat too, and also violent criminals who might be motivated by Christianity, white supremacy, etc.

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

it was naive to think Trump wouldn’t immediately change his mind if big tech changed their tune, pampered him, and made him feel like a little princess. I personally didn’t expect big tech to cozy up to Trump so hard

Good points. Alas it seems that Trump's supposed care "for the little guys" was just a ploy for him to gain power. Although I guess there are many "little guys" that he never even pretended to care about: immigrants, Muslims, antifa, etc.

Edit: typo

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The biggest threat to national security isn’t jihadis or the Russians, it’s privatisation and global free market capitalism.

Why not "all of the above"?

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Wanting to make sure that Big Tech plays by the rules is one thing, but I still think it's pretty crazy that he said Republicans now stand "for the little guys". Even in December 2024 I think that's a pretty crazy thing to say.

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk -5 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Of course there's the fact that Proton's CEO praised Trump. Here's his tweet:

A tweet by Andy Yen, CEO of Proton, on 4th December 2024. The tweet has a picture of a Truth Social post by Donald Trump, where Trump announces someone he has picked for the Department of Justice, to take on Big Tech. Andy Yen's tweet says: "Great pick by @realDonaldTrump. 10 years ago, Republicans were the party of big business and Dems stood for the little guys, but today the tables have completely turned. People forget that the current antitrust actions against Big Tech were started under the first Trump admin."

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 2 points 1 month ago

All societies have morals right? In pretty much any country, if you say something that is considered bad in that country, people won't like you. That's not censorship, it's just morals. In many countries, racism is usually considered bad, so if you say something that seems racist, many people won't like you.

If DHH wanted to make a point about culture in London then it's possible to do that without tying it to ethnicity.

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 4 points 1 month ago

Let’s not say that reverse racism is a real thing, because that’s an imaginary racist trope.

My view is that racism can happen to any ethnicity: black, brown, white, anybody. It depends on the situation. If a business run entirely by white people disallows entry to a black person because they're black, that's racist, but if the races were reversed (a business run entirely by black people disallows entry to a white person because they're white), I'd say that's also racist. In fact if I end up talking to a white person about racism I might deliberately give them an example of a situation where a white person could experience racial discrimination, because that might make them think "fair point, I would dislike it if someone was racist to me, so maybe racism is a bad thing".

[–] moderatecentrist@feddit.uk 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not a fascist or a troll, and if someone wants to read exactly what DHH wrote, then they can click on the link to his blog post, which is in my summary. I think it's good that you're quoting more of it to be honest, so people can see what he wrote, and they can decide for themselves what they think about it. I'm not trying to "whitewash" anything, I just wanted to give people an overview of the situation so they can draw their own conclusions, whether positive or negative.

view more: ‹ prev next ›