August 2018 Politics Thread




I’m still kind of irked by the fact that anyone takes Dan Hodges seriously when it comes to this.


he’s a proper fucking trash fire of a man


Did I imagine someone on the radio earlier suggesting that since Johnson’s summer job is to write articles for the Telegraph that get everyone talking then he’s done a really cracking job?

Beyond satire that this Labour/anti-Semitism row can be going on at the same time as government ministers are popping up to say variants on “bit strong I’ll give you, but he’s only saying what everyone’s thinking in’t he?”


This turned out to be false btw.


Someone said that Dan Hodges self-owns like a real-life Wint, and then I finally ‘got’ Wint.


nope, it was accurate, the person that said it was untrue then got pinned down to semantics. ‘okay so he IS elected to the board but he’s not sitting yet so it doesn’t count’.


Ahhhh right. I just saw the bit where the Board of Deputies chipped in saying he wasn’t, but fair enough.


yep, that’s the bit hodges was retweeting heavily


someone on twitter linked to this rebecca solnit quote about hope and it was a good thing to read for me cause i get despondant easily around climate change stuff.


It’s often said that hope is an attachment to outcome. It could be argued that hopelessness is often also rooted in desire, the attachment to nothing being demanded of us and an easy path. Which makes it the same as optimism, also rooted in the desire that nothing be asked of us because it’ll all be fine without us. Hope accepts the demands.

Hope–active hope, engaged hope-- can be imagined as a possession or attachment, but it can also be regarded as a demand that we dispossess ourselves of convenient despair, pessimism, optimism, and irresponsibility. We say people lose hope but often they discard, hide, bury, or deny it so they can cling to the opposites. Hope pries you loose from noncommitment more than nonattachment.

Many people are attached to an idea of freedom that means no obligations, no responsibilities. Hope can be experienced as obligation, because if it is possible to save a life (or a species or many lives or an institution that protects the vulnerable ) then you may (and perhaps should) feel an obligation to pursue that good. The other kind of freedom, the freedom to act out of our own power and possibility, the freedom to respond with generosity and compassion to the ways we are interconnected, the freedom to connect, also matters.

It could also be said that despair and pessimism are, like optimism, attachment to one’s own false omniscience, to presuming to know what will happen (and that what will happen is inevitable and thus nothing is demanded of us). Hope and uncertainty are sisters, versions of the same perspective.

A friend pointed out that the word encourage means to instill courage; discourage means the opposite; do your best to encourage, not with false cheer but with fierce commitment, and the subtle work we do with how we treat each other matters, as does the obvious work to transform the systems around us.


Heh, course he would. (I didn’t see him do that myself).


I really need to read this book again, because I’ve been feeling so utterly despondent over it all. Don’t know why but it’s really gotten to me lately more than usual.


same pal, I might should read it, not read anything of hers before.

been thinking a lot about how almost none of the media I take in is hopeful or reconstructive, and the stuff that is seems complacent and rubbish. can’t be good for me.


mark fisher is quite good, I mean he never sugar coated anything about this stage of capitalism, but he at least makes you feel a little less alone. reminds me of DFW in that regard.


Do you read New Socialist?

Lots of good, positive articles in there on organising, theory, practical stuff etc:

Also, Aditya Chakrabortty’s ‘The Alternatives’ pieces are good


no, I don’t. thanks for the recommendations.


Another week, another new party.

“What are we called? United for Change!”
“What do we want? A return to the status quo!”




Apparently he was “just looking for clarity” over which parts of Johnson’s article were offensive.

Utterly appalling behaviour.