And with a much better government and standard of living than a number of European nations. Don't see NZ falling apart due to blatant corruption like the UK.
More evidence provided to show the right wing of the Labour party sabotaged Corbyn and everyone associated with him.
- Thread starter crimson5pheonix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yeah if you are a weathly oligarch, why don’t you ask the average NZ citizen if they can buy a house or apartment.
*googles*
Apparently in 2018, the NZ home ownership rate was less than 1% less than that of the UK (64.5% vs 65.2%). So, ok, the UK was better about that issue, slightly, but I think my point remains.
Only because they banned foreigners from buying homes in NZ from Silicon Valley and communist China on 2018. It was one of the NZ PM’s best policy decisions, and I would 100% do the same.
I do not care.
You constantly complain about the left and advocate that they adopt right-wing policies out of "pragmatism". You seem to genuinely, genuinely hate a lot of minorities, and now you're posting fucking Pinochet memes, the cruelest and most genuinely revolting of fascist "jokes" short of the overt racist shit.
And doing it in a post where you criticize people for being "anti-NATO" is, and I'm moderating my language again, unbelievably tone-deaf in a way that reflects extremely poorly on either your moral processing or your intelligence.
The controversy you're referring to is Corbyn being interviewed on al-Mayadeen, a Lebanese channel. That interview took place years after Current TV (a US channel later renamed to al-Jazeera America after being bought by the Qatari company al-Jazeera) shut down.
What are you suggesting here? Are you suggesting that because Corbyn went on a network that hosts holocaust deniers he must be a holocaust denier, or are you suggesting that appearing on said network was a mistake from an optics standpoint? If the latter, I agree, but I don't really see why that justifies the level of emotion you seem to have about it.
This is simply an outright lie, and a very good example of why so little of the criticism of Corbyn is deserving of serious consideration.
Corbyn was a prominent critic of Putin back when he was considered a Western ally in the war on terror, when Putin was recieving state visits from Tony Blair and George Bush and back when Russian forces were dropping fuel air bombs on civilians in Grozny. In 2008, he publicly accused the Russian election, which saw Putin's united Russia party win every seat in the country, of being rigged. He has consistently criticized the human rights situation in Russia for literally decades. He has also been a prominent critic of Russian influence in British politics and the vast sums of Russian money funneled into the Tory party, even when it was unpopular and resulted in backlash from within his own party. He has also called for the immediate withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine.
How exactly would you say he has "enabled" Putin? Would you say he "enabled" Putin more than Boris Johnson, who came up with this claim that Corbyn is somehow pro-Putin, who owes his political relevance in part to Russian influence, whose party recieves millions in Russian donations and who is personally friends with several people close to Putin?
Where is Beijing again?
Last edited:
Our number will be lower by the end of next year if thr interest rate thing keeps going, lot of people will default.
Apparently our housing minimum standards are generally better than NZ ones in terms of insulation etc, though that only affects new stock, and a lot of ours is old (including mine).
The property markets in both countries are ludicrous.
I don't care that you don't care, your just wrong. Your a typical alt left, anti-NATO ideologue. You ignore evidence to the contrary, and anyone who isn't with you is against you. As for the meme, yeah I use certain memes for certain people I dislike, I use Munich hanging memes for Nazis, helicopter memes for communists like JC, French style memes for the elite, and neoliberals.
As for morals, they are but a luxury in this world, the real fascists', communists don't use them, so why should I. Also didn't the left has killed tens to hundreds of millions in and due to China, and the USSR. As for hating minorities the only people I really hate are anti-NATO JC supporters like you, CPC and CCP party members, and the various militaries and governments I dislike which are Russia, NK, Iran, China, and Assad Syria.
I don't support right wing public policy, I support the left wing using right wing tactics like 2nd amendment self defense due to the right wing also arming themselves and to a larger degree unless we can get rid of 2A, and balance of power stabilizes btw the left, and right. As for defund the police, and aggressive affirmative action, I think we should increase the number of slots in élite colleges instead while keeping pell grants, and eventually doing free college. I only dislike abolishing the police because it doesn't work, and I dislike defunding the police because it's not popular.
Well, if you want to be better (more moral, if you like) than them, it kinda is important.
Because... the worst people on the planet doing something is not an excuse to do it yourself? Because of basic human compassion?
What relevance does this have when you're talking to someone who isn't expressing support for those places?
Because something you need to fight fire with fire or else Holodomor, and the Holocaust happen. Look at the US for example, we agree to x, but don't agree to y international law, because it means we maintain our interests, and by doing so the US is a protected city on the hill for millions of refugees and isn't controlled by China or the USSR.
Well JC is a leftists/anti-American imperialists' whitewasher like Noam Chomsky, the anti-US faction can do no wrong, and everything is wrong due to the west, and or the US. If I asked JC about US imperialisms, I would get a different emotional answer than asking him about PRC, or USSR imperialism. JC and Blue believe in a black, and white worldview on US foreign policy.
I will worry about morals when the democratic party is more efficient with workers rights, a new economic system other than capitalism wins that is better than it in a cost benefit analysis way to almost everyone, and China, Russia, Iran, NK, and actual fascists', and communists lose.
The prosperity and independence of the US is not dependent on its willingness to break international law. At all.
All of this is just vague bloviation, no detail.
Corbyn condemned imperialism the world over, and the gripe about the "emotion" he displays while doing so is just distracting tone police guff. And nobody here is standing with the PRC or Russia. You're ranting at shadows and imagined threats.
Last edited:
He is against NATO which fights Russia, and likely in the future China.
Jeremy Corbyn would like to see Nato ‘ultimately disband’
Former Labour leader does not blame Nato for Russian invasion but questions role of military alliances
www.theguardian.com
Also the US following it's interests gives it power even when it's not moral.
But can you explain why those are important without referring, ultimately, to morality?
Because when dealing with totalitarian ruthless ideologies you too have be ruthless unless you want to be destroyed by said people with said ideas.
"Ultimately disband". I too would like to see a world where nuclear military alliances are rendered obsolete.
Conveniently vague. What exactly are you talking about?
What's the point in defeating a rival power if you're indistinguishable from it?
So you're literally just saying the ends justify any means.
Even means that are unnecessary to reach those ends.
"Unnecessary" = unneeded. By which I mean the US is perfectly capable of maintaining its prosperity and security without taking the grotesque criminal actions it does.
It is in fact perfectly capable of improving the quality of life both at home and abroad, but chooses not to.
Home I agree, but abroad nope. There are 7-9 billion people. Also the last time the Us helped countries with FDI, the communists in China backstab us. Peter Zeihan is right, there will never be the 1990s again.