Consept

I'm more than open to changing my mind and I'm not expecting you to agree. But if you are going to engage you have to come with an argument and some evidence. Your argument in your first post was something along the lines of "two tier policing exists and everyone on the UK knows it". Do you get how this isn't really a good argument? Also I haven't passively expected anything, I've presented numerous arguments that you haven't actually addressed. If you just want to say 'I'm going to have my opinion no matter what you say' then fair enough but obviously there's not gonna be any discussion. For example we could debate the idea that everyone believes that Tommy Robinson is a hero or that my opinion is a minority. Would a poll of people from the UK asking then what they think about the riots be a good way to judge this? Luckily that exists, from yougov - 14% strongly support the riots 75% strongly oppose the unrest at the riots 1 in 8 Britons say riots we're justified 74% blame far right groups for the riots 19% have a positive opinion of tommy robinson 40% dislike him 12% neutral https://yougov.co.uk/topics/international/explore/public_figure/Tommy_Robinson https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50257-the-public-reaction-to-the-2024-riots Do these make you rethink any of your assertions? What specifically do you disagree with in the 'propoganda' that I posted as you say its not true?

Im still waiting for you to give a valid argument against the original video. Do you care about the white grooming gangs or the massive problem of sex trafficking in eastern european countries that dont have many immigrants? There are thousands of victims of human trafficking every year in eastern europe, its literally a multi billion industry. This seems like a bigger issue, dont you think? Why isnt Tommy Robinson focused on this? Do you think if there were brown immigrants that were the perpetrators that he might be? I havent obfuscated anything, youve deflected away from the central point because youre not actually able to answer anything. Can i ask you because i am trying to understand where youre coming from Id apprciate if you could answer these questions clearl - Do you think muslims are more likely to commit crimes just by virtue of being muslim? Do you think that if a section of an ethnic group commits crimes, the whole ethnic group should be punished? Do you think its justified to treat legal immigrants badly because of perceived crimes? Do you think muslims are inherently bad people?

I agree with you, conscious politics is looking at things as authentically as you can. I think there is almost an instinct when approaching politics to looks at things as right v left or us v them. What Trump has done is effectively hijacked the traditional right, so that when people are talking about politics they now think conservative right means Trump which it doesnt. This is further evidenced by a huge amount of conservatives who are traditional and have principles, distancing themselves from him such a Romney, Liz Chaney etc but also those that have actually worked with him like John Bolton, Mike Pence and countless others. What youre left with is either those that have no integrity and see getting on board with Trump as a way in or those that do have an ideological belief and see Trump as someone who can lower the walls enough so they can enact it, this is what we're seeing with Project 25 which is basically a plan for a Christian Theocracy. I think the left-bias idea is just a way to dismiss the valid questioning of this new Trumpism. Its really a false equivalency when you hear things like, 'theyre just as bad as each other' or 'two sides of the same coin'. Its actually really strange to normalise an attempted coup of the US and have a president literally recorded trying to get governers of states to change election results. What im curious about is if Trump does lose, what will happen to the republican party? I think hes almost sped up their decline.

Orange is going to be richer than Blue

Here's how I see it - traditionally right and left actually could never be too far apart simply because the mass public is not that far apart politically, there will be key differences in the policy that they want but generally they would agree on the concept of democracy, most past wars were literally fought to preserve democracy and defend it from other ideologies taking hold. In general left believes in the collective whereas right is more individualistic. Society therefore is like a mix between these two and probably functions relatively well using both polarities. If we say 10 being as right as possible and 0 being as left as possible, traditionally dems are like 3 or 4 and cons are 6 or 7, progressives are further left and far right is obviously further right. What has been happening in recent times is the shift has been moving more left dems always win the popular vote, more young people vote for dems etc so people are favouring more the collective. So essentially the conservatives as we knew them were slowly dying. But also the left were becoming complacent. Trump came in as the cons didn't really have anyone they believed could win, but his strategy was to engage those that were still hanging on to the right and weren't going to shift. The messaging of make america great again, was actually pretty genius in what would speak to them. Also you have to remember how Obama was painted by the right, although he's probably a 3 on the scale he was being painted as a 1. Which meant that the right felt they needed a candidate that was opposite to a 1 to get their balance back. Trump is probably an 8 but I don't even know how to rate him as he seems almost sepeate from the scale in that his main focus is him, he doesn't actually have policies or some mission he's trying to enact, he just wants power. So to answer your question this is not traditional left or right, this is Trumpism v democracy. If you think of Trump vs the Bushes, he is very far away from them in terms of what he wants to do. The dems are still fairly central but the Trump voters are painting them to basically be communists simply because the opposite of communist ideology is facism, so to normalise facism they need to the paint the picture of battli g communists. Maga is essentially living in a different reality. But I think dems are playing it well pointing out the weirdness and staying on their message.

I'm not gonna watch a 2 hour propaganda documentary made by Tommy robinson fans. Especially as you haven't actually given a response to any of the points raised. If I can guess the doc will talk about how he's a hero of working class Britain, how he's unfairly targeted by a system that let's Muslims get away with criminal acts, how he hasn't got freedom of speech, how he's a journalist and activist that only cares about Britain and is definitely not racist because he had black and Asian friends. Am I close?

I believe what I can verify as true no matter the source. You do understand you haven't actually refuted a single point anyone's raised. @Jacob Morresposted his convictions via Wikipedia but these all have sources, wikipedia is jist presnting them, are you disputing the sources which is literally the criminal justice system? Also you claim he's anti-violent yet I shared 3 clips of him literally being aggressively violent, how do you account for that? Please do not deflect as well, just stay on topic. It's also funny how you say don't trust BBC and Wikipedia even though they have lots of regulations (not saying they're perfect) but trust this random tommy robinson fan that made a documentary on youtube, little but hypocritical no?

There are probably some cases where it makes sense to manipulate, like if someone was going to kill themselves and you cared about them youd probably try everything you could to save them. Look at addiction interventions, from what i see in films anyway, theres always some kind of coercion to get them to the venue where they basically get ambushed. Or with young kids you might exaggerate certain dangers so that they do hurt themselves. You can make the argument that all these things are wrong and truly you dont know whats best for people, maybe they need to go further down the dark road, but i think its hard to let that happen if you have the power to potentially change it. Another example is with governments, where people complain because they limit freedom, sometimes of course they can go overboard. But lets take something like seatbelts, you could argue that making seatbelts compulsory by law is manipulation, its almost forcing people to do something and people at the time complained and protested, but since it was put into law in the USA from 1975 up until 2017, it saved an estimated 374,276 lives (according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). So essentially without that form of manipulation all those lives wouldve been lost. This is the crux of the issue is that when you have power, either a someones boss, parent, relative, friend, leader whatever, you do have some kind of responsibility for them and that may include subtle forms of manipulation. The hard part is balancing that with giving them as much freedom as possible, but it definitely is a balance and not as easy as just saying 'let them do whatever', because i just dont think thats realistic in life.

Nah it will never happen, of course they want to keep a low profile for fear of deportation, but just interesting to think how effective it would be

The joke is they dont realise their way of life that theyre trying desperately to protect from immigrants would not be able to sustain without immigrants, theres a certain irony to that. That is crazy, I feel like all this discontent could be sorted out if all immigrants legal and illegal went on strike for a week. All these powerful western countries would literally shut down

He's always saying outlandish shit, so whenever they charge him he can't point to that and say 'they don't like what I'm saying and they're trying to silence me'. He's cooked, the amount of charges, even if he gets off some there's so many from different countries. I'd be surprised if he doesn't flee at some point. I think his restriction of movement was put back to just Romania, so it would be harder to flee.

This is an interesting observation. I wonder if you questioned those that are dead against immigration, would you rather work a farm or low level manual labour job or have immigration, what would they choose? Because really that would be a way to make immigration not as necessary. Its a mutually exclusive situation, if you don't have anyone to work these jobs you have to immigration.

If you want to dispute something ou should dispute the facts presented not the source of the facts. All these convictions are in the records, if we gave you direct evidence from the prison authority about his convictions, would that change your mind on him? He is very much anti-islam, there have been numerous convictions of people within his own group of violence, rape, pedophilia of which he has never called out. It is interesting how convincing he is for some people, i cant imagine watching him and thinking, 'this is a hero' Heres some of the greatest hits from an anti-violent guy -

this almost feels like satire. No he's not a hero and will not go down as a hero. You're really over exaggerating his influence on the UK, he literally has the power to rile up a few ex-football hooligans and cause a bit of mayhem every now and then through his hatred of Islam, which is mainly because of his zionist paymasters. He's a thug that had found a way to make some money stoking up hate, no one cares about him here in the UK. I am curious why you love him so much, what documentary did you watch or what happened? Here's him being exposed by an ex-colleague

Do you have evidence for this or is it a feeling? Do you really think there are no pedophile rings with white people? I'm aware of the grooming gangs scandal, the police fucked up but that happens a lot. Look at Jimmy Saville and the tons of white men who the police didn't investigate properly through the years. So to be sure I'm not saying that grooming gangs don't exist, I'm saying that a fuck up from the police is not indicative of a two tier system. It would be like if someone black committed a crime and pointed to all the white men who weren't convicted to say he's being treated unfairly. The thing is you don't actually know how many white people slide through and don't get convicted. Even though you don't know this you're quick to form a strong opinion and argue without any facts. Tommy Robinson is loved by the Zionist elites that pay for his salary. You ever find it weird how he promotes Israel especially since he started with neo-nazi organisations?

Heres the link to the thread The current complaint is about the riots, the claim is that the far right are treated differently when it comes to protests and riots. If its not about that do you concede that there isn't really a difference then? Regarding grooming gangs here's the thing you would have to prove that Pakistani muslim grooming gangs are prosecuted differently then other white grooming gangs as a rule because thats your claim, do you have statistics or any evidence you can show to prove this? Why are you so sure this is the case? Further than that, there is history of black and Asian people being treated unfairly compared to their white counterparts, that has been happening for years, do you care about that or only when it happens to far right white people?

The moral justification is irrelevant, the question was are rioters being treated differently in terms of the justice system, thats the whole premise of two-tier policing. Also the 2024 riots were not justified as they were based on a lie in the first instance, as well immigration is a nuanced issue, to say its morally justified to attack mosques because of immigration is kinda ridiculous. It may be more justifiable if they were rioting in downing street or something. It is a matter of opnion and theres also plenty of facts to show that black people are treated unfairly in the justice system. But youre right is a matter of opinion and it doesnt relate to what we're talking about which is far right being treated more harshly. You posted a video and didnt want me to address what was in the video?? Ive covered grooming gangs extensively in another thread. But again this is a deflection, im looking for evidence suggesting a 2 tier policing system.

I don't really get your argument, have you got any evidence or even a coherent argument that proves two- tier policing? I can agree with you that potentially they're going a bit far with the Facebook stuff but in reality it's at least the same if not worse on the extreme Muslim side and has been since 9/11 and even more so after 7/7, so the right is not being specifically targeted. Even if we say Tommy Robinson was treated unfairly, which I don't believe as he has stoked more hatred than anyone, but let's grant you it, it's still just anecdotal, it's one example, I could give you 1000 examples of black and Asian people being treated unfairly but it becomes redundant unless its put into context. Why is something similar not valid? Like if 2 different people commit the same crime wouldnt it be valid to look at both cases to see if ones treated fairly or not?

That definitely wasn't my only argument, that was an observation. I refuted the points that you raised and more in the earlier text. What you did there is called a strawman which is literally take something, in this case was just an observation and not at all the crux of my argument and then attacked that position saying its my only argument even though your only argument literally was 'everyone knows it'. If you look at what I wrote I even agreed with Murray on one point. I'm jist saying that he didn't actually provide any clear argument for me to even dispute. Back to the original question can you argue for the treatment by police for the 2011 riots being significantly different from these 2024 riots? If you can this would help prove the two tier system that you claim as its 2 very similar incidents with the only difference being the social group they belong to. Its OK to say you can't btw

I did watch your video but he doesnt actually mention grooming gangs, hes talking about knife crime in London committed by black youths as an explanation for a the higher rate in stop and search for black youths, which is 9x more than white youths. He says that police were more cautious to stop and search because it might appear racist because the stop and search rate is so high. The thing is this isnt evidence of a two tier system because white youths were stopped much less in the first place, you can make some argument about the rate of crime warranting the stops which could be true but it doesnt confirm black people getting favourable treatment, it just shows police and the community dont know how to handle it. Black youths still get longer sentences for equivalent crimes and treated generally different to their white counterparts in the justice system. At best its an example of the different challenges for different communities but youd have to outline the link to a two tier system that is alleged. Whats interesting is that the main determiners for violent crime are things like poverty and violence in the home, Glasgow actually had more knife crime than london and this was overwhelmingly amongst white youths a this is the population in Glasgow. Now theyve got knife crime down to basically 0 youth deaths. You might say how, they did it through a conscious effort of treating it as a public health issue essentially looking at the root causes of crime. They used tools like early prevention, education, providing training, changing legislation, all these things contributed to vastly changing the situation. If you notice the police officer only talked of stop and search, which is also a tool but in isolation doesnt get to the root of it. When you consider that in England funding for youth services has been cut by 74% in comparison to 13 years ago and then also in that time period deaths from knife crime have doubled, you start to see what the cause really is. Of course correlation doesnt equal causation however this is quite startling information. Many youth clubs and programs have shut down under the conservatives and it would be pretty safe to say they would have had an effect on youth violence for the positive. But yeah ill be happy to hear your evidence that disputes what ive said or disproves the treatment of the rioters in 2011 vs the 2024 rioters. Its funny how you guys tend to post videos from gb news and sky news Australia opinion pieces, both heavily right wing media outlets owned by right wing people. GB news is currently having legal problems because they cant classify most their shows as news because its not factual enough. Regarding the actual video you posted, he doesnt actually make any case for two-tier policing, he literally says everyone knows it, which is actually a nothing statement. I do agree with him where he says underlying causes should be addressed though. But if youre going with the stance that it does exist im happy to hear your argument that disputes the different treatment between the 2011 rioters and the 2024. Im using this as its the most direct comparison.

Ill give a different point of view than others. Its good you are noticing how youre feeling, but also this is a normal feeling in this situation, its a fearful response to the unknown. Now the question is do you want to be led by fear or led by love? If you notice, your fear is manifesting into justifications for not going. Your love recognises that you care for your friend and that it would be good to go, if only it wasnt for reasons. I respect the work youre doing but if this work means that you are now unable to even interact with people, then what is the point? There needs to be some bravery in confronting the past but ultimately if you can just be and relax in the situation you will most likely enjoy it. If this was your really good friend this will be a once in a lifetime moment to share with him, i think if you do go youll be surprised at how much you enjoy it. Also not going seems an effort to hold on to your 'spiritual identity' as we know identities dont really exist so its also a good practice to be challenging your identity. Good luck whatever you choose

@joeyi99 Hey man, first of all I really respect your bravery in terms of challenging yourself and putting yourself out there. You also seem very positive despite what you say has been a lack of results, it would be easy to fall down the black pill rabbit hole so im glad thats not an option for you. Also your pick up wasnt bad at all, I think id struggle to do cold approach like that, so even that is inspiring. But... theres a couple of things i have noticed which i think you need to work on. There is obviously something going on internally in terms of self-worth, I would question whether you actually want a girlfriend at this time or whether you think having a girlfriend will solve your internal issues. The idea being if someone else can love and validate me then i dont need to confront myself internally of not loving and validating myself. You need to accept fully who you are, at the moment it seems you are trying to change who you are to become someone who is 'acceptable'. These internal issues come out in your pick up, although youve got all the fundamentals covered and it looks good, there is a sub-communication of unworthiness. When you do improve the internal issues you will have a mindset of take it or leave it when interacting because you will realise your own value. An analogy is, if I'm a salesman who knows my product is shit, im going to try and convince you that its actually good but ultimately it will be an inauthentic interaction because im essentially trying to trick you, so i might have a flashy presentation, use all kind of buzzwords, anything i can do to get the sale. Whereas if im a salesman who knows im selling a valuable item, even if the people im selling to dont know the value, all im going to do is present it to them, im not going to try and convince them, all my work has been in developing the item, so my attitude would be more take it or leave it but this is what it is. So yeah, work on the internal issues, if you feel unworthy explore why that is, why dont you accept yourself, this is deep work and will take time, but youre young and have it so dont worry.

@Epikur Can you directly dispute the points in the video i posted? For example the claim by those putting forward the two-tier policing idea are saying that white right wing rioters are being treated differently, but when you do a direct comparison with the riots that happened in 2011 this is provably not the case, are you disputing that or are you deflecting to another subject?

Its not blaming the elite population, its blaming specific people who are provably able and do move the needle on topics like immigration through their power and influence. This isnt to blame them for immigration itself but there is justified blame for them stoking up these feelings in certain groups, you can see this in the rhetoric that the groups use as its identical to the media theyve consumed. This is how propaganda works. Its not the same as blaming the immigrant population because these are things that actually happened and that people like Rupert Murdoch are directly responsible for. A great example is the recent riots where a terrible thing happened but then riots occured because of the influence of certain people who claimed the killer was something he wasnt, that happened in real time. So i think youre making a false equivalency with your statement.

It's the oldest trick in the book to scapegoat immigrants, it's easy for the elite and politicians to do because if you're looking at the immigrants you're not looking at them. What I will say is true is that there is a xenophobic and racist sentiment that natives of a country will have but this is stoked by the elites because they know that sentiment exists. The elite own the media that the working class read. Rupert Murdoch has literally been known as a 'king maker' in the UK because he will choose which candidate to promote and they will usually win. So it's not an accident what his media publishes and why they publish it. Working class is 100% influenced by the elites