this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
34 points (94.7% liked)

UK Politics

3091 readers
109 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 24 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You can. But honestly most sane people do not.

More so when you know a significant % of your audiance dislikes the vision immensely.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

“You can take issue with Mrs Thatcher’s prescription, but she had a big manifesto for change and set about a course that lasted for over two decades.”

What exactly is incorrect about what he said there?

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 21 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The word visionary.

Hitler could be described in a simlar way.

But if you called him a visionary id assume rightly so that you agree with a significant % of his odeals.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

If people can't understand words and how the context in which they're used makes a difference, that's not really David Lammy's fault. Besides, the only people this would likely "infuriate" are the kind of cranks that don't need an excuse to hate the Labour Party anyway.

I mean, what aspect of Lammy's career suggests that he is in any way sympathetic to the Conservative Party or to conservative ideals?

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 13 points 8 months ago

Yep. And the word visionary specifically refers to planning a future with wisdom.

So no you are incorrect. When someone uses the term visionary. They are very much suggesting they think the ideals moved towards were wise.

While it is entirly possible that David Lamy made the same mistake you have.

Criticism of his use of the word is not incorrect.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps he should have chosen phrasing that was less likely to explode in his face.

For example, “Margaret Thatcher had horrible politics, but it appears she believed them. Let’s not talk about her anymore.” There, short, unambiguous, and he’d still get to mention Margaret Thatcher, which was apparently important to him.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

He's making the comparison because he wants the Labour Party to have the same kind of visionary spirit as someone like Thatcher. Not to copy the politics or ideology.

This is really not difficult. But because Thatcher is mentioned, everyone has a hissy fit.

[–] cook_pass_babtridge@feddit.uk 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well yeah. There are other visionaries that haven't damaged the UK as much as Thatcher, he could have mentioned them instead. But he didn't - he made the decision to call Thatcher a visionary, same as Rachel Reeves did. It's not just some arbitrary name he pulled out of a hat.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Because she's the most recent example.

Everyone who came after has just been a bland Prime Minister who doesn't really want to do anything.