anti-NF protest on Monday Oct. 25th

[monkey]

I'm with Ian here too. If you vote' date=' you're a political activist. And opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one. I have more respect for an ordinary voter than I do for anarchists like all systems fail who want to tear it all down. Unlike ASF, however, I believe he has the right to his opinion and consider it just as valid as mine and would never seek to deprive him of his platform, like he continually advocates for people or groups that do not share his view. eg the NF, non politically active people, Ian ect.[/quote']

Voting not about "political activism" voting is a pathetic sham and the least important part of democracy. If you think that you will seriously effect change my simply voting you need your head examined.. Most political research charting political activism start with voting as the most basic form of participation on any continuoum of participation. If you want effect actual policies you must get involved in a party at a local level, otherwise all you do is pick between several vehicles rather than influence where they actually go.

I my self have generally found AllSystemsFail to be a rare voice of reason on most issues. Though I might not agree with everything he says, he puts forward logical, reasoned arguments unlike a large number of posters.

[soundian]

Voting not about "political activism" voting is a pathetic sham and the least important part of democracy. If you think that you will seriously effect change my simply voting you need your head examined.. Most political research charting political activism start with voting as the most basic form of participation on any continuoum of participation. If you want effect actual policies you must get involved in a party at a local level' date=' otherwise all you do is pick between several vehicles rather than influence where they actually go.

I my self have generally found AllSystemsFail to be a rare voice of reason on most issues. Though I might not agree with everything he says, he puts forward logical, reasoned arguments unlike a large number of posters.[/quote']

So people who only vote aren't politically active and therefore don't count.

They also need their head examined for not realising that being politically active is the only was forward.

[Cloud]

and i hope for Scotland's sake that party system increases because the more alternative political opinions there is the better;)

i think there's definitely room for a centre-right nationalist party - if you think about it, the left is pretty much covered, whereas on the right, there's just the Tories, who are unionist by name and nature.

7 party system anyone?

[Lawy Lawson:Attorney]

hey' date=' do you get right wing punk?[/quote']

Yeah. Kind of. Me an ASF had a good discussion on this board a while a go about it.

[Doc]

Voting not about "political activism" voting is a pathetic sham and the least important part of democracy. If you think that you will seriously effect change my simply voting you need your head examined.. Most political research charting political activism start with voting as the most basic form of participation on any continuoum of participation. If you want effect actual policies you must get involved in a party at a local level' date=' otherwise all you do is pick between several vehicles rather than influence where they actually go.

I my self have generally found AllSystemsFail to be a rare voice of reason on most issues. Though I might not agree with everything he says, he puts forward logical, reasoned arguments unlike a large number of posters.[/quote']

I too find ASF interesting on some issues. I may disagree with a lot of what he says but I'll defend to the death his right to think and say it. Unlike the man himself.

I'm not getting into any conspiracy theory nonsense about politics or the "way the government controls us" shite. I've got better things to do than associate with the bottom feeding clowns in today's politics. As they say, the shite always rises to the top. The smells that surround it are the political activists.

[Guest tv tanned]

I thought Hobbes worked for an MP/councillor' date=' surely that's a job and not activism, but he still deserves more respect, cos he's paid to care.[/quote']

I don't just do the work thing 9-5 and take the pay packet. I do tonnes of voluntary activism in the evenings and on weekends.

I realise there's probably a cynical way to spin that one. Also the volume of work that I do for the pay that I receive means that in no way shape or form am I doing it for the money!!!

[Flossie T Sheep]

I'm with Ian here too. If you vote' date=' you're a political activist. And opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one. I have more respect for an ordinary voter than I do for anarchists like all systems fail who want to tear it all down. Unlike ASF, however, I believe he has the right to his opinion and consider it just as valid as mine and would never seek to deprive him of his platform, like he continually advocates for people or groups that do not share his view. eg the NF, non politically active people, Ian ect.[/quote']

i think to add to that point you raise, surely putting yourself forward as a potential candidate for your area is another form of political activism?

i have always thought its best to try and change things from within the structure than throw stones at it from the outside

i believe ASF has the right to his opinion but i don't think the tact he uses is particularly constructive and not really democratic by any nature, begrudging others for not taking similar steps or routes or measures as he has done with his own endeavours and devaluing their opinion for not acting in the same ways he has doesn't really endear me or others i have noticed on this thread to the cause he supports

i think the motives behind his endeavours are done for a just cause but i become suspicious when people like him start preaching what their ethics are to other people in order to bully others into following, i think guilt-tripping people into supporting a cause isn't the right way to do things and i got that impression from his reply to Cloud and i think his dismissive attitude, for example "this is my last post so don't ask me any more questions", is something that struck me as being not too democratic either

i think more progress is made by discussing such issues with people who have different opinions and outlooks on the matter rather than a room full of people who all represent the same activist group, at least then you get alternative solutions to the problems, the air that people in activist groups give me when they deal with issues like the National Front is this "if you ain't with us then you must be with them" attitude that emanates from them at times, that in itself is an invented prejudice designed to guilt-trip people into supporting their cause and i can't tolerate that authoritative attitude, i'd prefer to make up my own mind thanks very much and draw my own conclusions and from there make my own decisions on how to voice my own opinion as an individual;)

[soundian]

I think it's ironic that I'm treated as a lesser human being by someone who's so vocal in opposing prejudice.

Surely political activists should be rejoicing that someone like me even takes the time to think about such issues, never mind debate them.

If my opinion's not as deserving of respect as others, maybe I should just switch on the telly and vegetate,making sure I change channels at the first hint of a news program, leaving the political activists to get on with saving me, without my nasty, grubby opinions getting in the way.

[Doc]

I think it's ironic that I'm treated as a lesser human being by someone who's so vocal in opposing prejudice.

Surely political activists should be rejoicing that someone like me even takes the time to think about such issues' date=' never mind debate them.

If my opinion's not as deserving of respect as others, maybe I should just switch on the telly and vegetate,making sure I change channels at the first hint of a news program, leaving the political activists to get on with saving me, without my nasty, grubby opinions getting in the way.[/quote']

Hear hear.

[monkey]

I too find ASF interesting on some issues. I may disagree with a lot of what he says but I'll defend to the death his right to think and say it. Unlike the man himself.

I'm not getting into any conspiracy theory nonsense about politics or the "way the government controls us" shite. I've got better things to do than associate with the bottom feeding clowns in today's politics. As they say' date=' the shite always rises to the top. The smells that surround it are the political activists.[/quote']

Who said it had anything to do with conspiracy theories? o_O

Its the way political participation works. You really do have to be stupid not to see that if you vote (and I certainly think we all should) all you do is pick between a few alternatives every four years or so. You have no control on what thos political parties do the rest of the time, and no real control over whether any one of those parties forms a coherent political alternative to the other parties in the political system.

If you want to affect REAL change you must be politically active - that is involve your self in supporting groups that support issues you believe in or in parties that campaign on a number of issues. This is human behaviour not a conspiracy. Those senior members of political parties today got involved in just such a way. If you want to effect change do so to.

[monkey]

So people who only vote aren't politically active and therefore don't count.

They also need their head examined for not realising that being politically active is the only was forward.

You clearly don't have a clue what i'm actually saying.

I didn't say their views dont count - as you would see if you had actually read my post - But if you honestly think that if you cross a peice of paper once every four years then you are politically active I do wonder about your grasp of reality.

You cannot possibly be 'involved' in the political process if you simply vote every four years. you effectively give up your voice. Your vote is interpreted as support for any number of policies you may or may not have ever heard of. The point is you were not involved in creating those policies and you more than likely simply looked at the paper, looked at the choice of parties and picked the best of a bad bunch.

[Doc]

Who said it had anything to do with conspiracy theories? o_O

Its the way political participation works. You really do have to be stupid not to see that if you vote (and I certainly think we all should) all you do is pick between a few alternatives every four years or so. You have no control on what thos political parties do the rest of the time' date=' and no real control over whether any one of those parties forms a coherent political alternative to the other parties in the political system.

If you want to affect REAL change you must be politically active - that is involve your self in supporting groups that support issues you believe in or in parties that campaign on a number of issues. This is human behaviour not a conspiracy. Those senior members of political parties today got involved in just such a way. If you want to effect change do so to.[/quote']

Now we see the activists' contempt for the millions of voters who bother to exercise their rights. All these millions of people are out of step with reality but you're not?

[Rob Karloff]

I think that the time of "political activists" would be much better spent in actually directly helping people. Maybe working with the elderly or for societies such as Aberdeen Forum?? Last time I looked, participating in debates/discussions/meetings or marching down Union Street with a banner did little to help the common man.

[soundian]

You clearly don't have a clue what i'm actually saying.

I didn't say their views dont count - as you would see if you had actually read my post - But if you honestly think that if you cross a peice of paper once every four years then you are politically active I do wonder about your grasp of reality.

You cannot possibly be 'involved' in the political process if you simply vote every four years. you effectively give up your voice. Your vote is interpreted as support for any number of policies you may or may not have ever heard of. The point is you were not involved in creating those policies and you more than likely simply looked at the paper' date=' looked at the choice of parties and picked the best of a bad bunch.[/quote']

This is your view of non-politically active people, unable to make an informed choice on their own.

Please save us from ourselves.

Btw, I don't think it really matters wether I've heard of all the policies or not, or wether I agree with them all. In the party system in the UK EVERY party will have policies I don't agree with, wether I'm active in politics or not.

Did you go to the same workshop as allsystemsfail to develop this contempt for non-politically active people or did you manage all on your own?

[Flossie T Sheep]

Who said it had anything to do with conspiracy theories?

Its the way political participation works. You really do have to be stupid not to see that if you vote (and I certainly think we all should) all you do is pick between a few alternatives every four years or so. You have no control on what thos political parties do the rest of the time' date=' and no real control over whether any one of those parties forms a coherent political alternative to the other parties in the political system.

If you want to affect REAL change you must be politically active - that is involve your self in supporting groups that support issues you believe in or in parties that campaign on a number of issues. This is human behaviour not a conspiracy. Those senior members of political parties today got involved in just such a way. If you want to effect change do so to[/quote']

political activism is no worse than party politics, the same rules seem to apply to such groups too, everyone has to think the same to be accepted and if they think differently or stray away from the norm then they usually victimize that person, that kind of environment is too authoritarian for my liking and it doesn't allow individualism to flourish, it amounts to nothing more than another mob/gang mentality that strives for mass uniformity in numbers

like i said before, i will voice my opinion on issues i feel strongly for/against on my own terms, i don't need a mob behind me backing up my opinion nor do i feel the need to be in an activist group to give my opinions more gravitas or more gusto than the folk who ain't in activist groups

You clearly don't have a clue what i'm actually saying.

I didn't say their views dont count - as you would see if you had actually read my post - But if you honestly think that if you cross a peice of paper once every four years then you are politically active I do wonder about your grasp of reality.

You cannot possibly be 'involved' in the political process if you simply vote every four years. you effectively give up your voice. Your vote is interpreted as support for any number of policies you may or may not have ever heard of. The point is you were not involved in creating those policies and you more than likely simply looked at the paper' date=' looked at the choice of parties and picked the best of a bad bunch.[/quote']

but that attitude breeds apathy and indolence and doesn't do much to change anything, and may i also add that if you do not vote then you don't have a right to complain about it because you're not exercising your right to democracy by voting, the fact that less and less people are voting now is stupid and is allowing Tony Blair's government to stay in power, if people voted more then perhaps this wouldn't be the case, we the people are the majority in this world and we can all make a difference if more people bothered their arses to vote

be thankful you're allowed to express an opinion whenever or wherever you like in this country, there's countries in the world that wouldn't allow you the privilege, they'd shoot you in the back of the head or hang you from a fucking crane if you tried

best wishes,

el flosso

[monkey]

Doc:

If Im contemptuous of anyone it is of people who cant understand that if they are unhappy with the way things are then more than simply voting is required.

Soundian:

If your quite happy to vote for a political party without actually having a grasp of that partys policies then you are just an idiot.

Flossie T Sheep:

Your cynical view of political activism is understandable, but its also quite an inaccurate reflection of all political activists that I have ever encountered or studied.

If you found yourself victimized for your views would you not seek out more like-minded individuals?

If you found the environment authoritarian would you not seek to create a more open minded one with like-minded individuals?

Your suggestion seems to be that all organised political activity amounts to mob/gang mentality that strives for mass uniformity in numbers which though I might accept is occasionally the case, it is just laughable to suggest it is like that all the time.

As for you point about voting: You seem to assume that if more people voted they would for someone other than the Labour party which as a questionable assumption. It suggests that there is I group of people that dont vote and if they did vote they would vote for someone else. Im not sure this theory is backed up by any research...

What do you guys think political activism is? How in a political process do you think your voice can be heard?

If a community wants improved public services, speedbumps, improved lesure facilities they are not going to get these by voting once every four years!

If your have a particular issue about say for example the destruction of a nature reserve youre not going to put this issue on the political agenda by voting once every four years!

If you are unhappy about some aspect of UK foreign policy youre not going to highlight this issue by voting once every four years!

I would hope youre starting to see what Im getting at... Political activism can refer to a whole range of issues parents writing to councillors to prevent the closure of a local school; people writing to their local MP to protest about the lack of debt relief for Less Developed Countries; even campaigning within a political party to get it to adopt a policy It is about having some effect on the environment in which you live and has far more impact than simply voting every four years.

As I have already said if you only vote you cannot influence the policies of the parties you elect to power. Now lets have debate about that rather than some of the silliness which seems to pervade some opinions!

[spellchecker]

If you are unhappy about some aspect of UK foreign policy youre not going to highlight this issue by voting once every four years!

taking what you said above as a possibly overused example, i think a lot of people feel jaded about activism because the protest of 500,000 - 1,000,000 people in london, and the opinions and gut feeling of a nation, failed to stop the government entering into the coalition that attacked iraq. rightly or wrongly, i'm sure a lot of people think, "how much difference is it actually going to make?".

i agree with most of your post above though.

[Doc]

Let's look at activism as an active role in society and making a difference in the world shall we?

Those who bother to vote make a difference. Those who work and pay taxes make a difference. Everyone who recycles makes a difference. Everyone who walks instead of taking the car makes a difference. Everyone who buys fair trade goods makes a difference. Everyone who turns their heating down by two degrees makes a diference. Giving to charity makes a difference. Living a decent life by not sponging off the state or robbing people or getting involved in violence makes a difference.

If you have a "political activist" who doesn't work or contribute to society by paying taxes, and a great many of them are like this, but simply protests all the time, waving little banners and demonstrating at the expense of every taxpayer,then he is simply a parasite who makes no difference whatsoever.

If you have an activist who openly displays his contempt for people who's interest in politics begins and ends at exercising their democratic rights and contributing to the society they live in, then this activist is simply a cunt who has missed the point.

All political animals are the servants of the people not the other way around. You engage in politics by our, the peoples' leave.

But don't you dare say that non politcal people don't make a difference, because it's there that the difference begins. Not with self important, look at me activists.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

One post.

Angry that while I'd left this discussion, Doc still then continued to take swipes at me, I, instead of posting again, and in an attempt to challenge the points he'd made, sought to engage with him via pm. The response? He's ignored me. Not once, but three times. I've sought an explanation from him as to why, but still he refuses to respond. It's clear that he thinks (as I'd said I wouldn't post on this thread again) he can now attack me here with impunity.

Some points.

Voting changes little or nothing. People have chosen not to vote in great number. Why? Because they believe (and rightly so) that whichever party sits in government, not a damn thing will change.

And voting poiitical activism? lol

A contempt for those who do not take political action? I said nothing of the sort, so would ask people not to put words in to my mouth. Said only that I respect those who do take action. Throwing insults from afar is, as I've said, easy.

Most political activists do not work a job and so claim benefits? What nonsense. The folks I know who are politically active are either employed or are students.

Also, activists do not take action because they crave attention, but because they have a strong sense of justice and demand change.

Those who do not vote should be permitted no voice? Rubbish. I've never voted, and have no intention of ever doing so. My voting would lend a legitimacy to a system I despise - one whose function is to serve the interests of the established order.

And to the person who said I was being undemocratic coz I asked that folks not ask me further questions coz I was leaving the thread - how'd you figure that?

That's all.

[soundian]

One post.

Angry that while I'd left this discussion' date=' Doc still then continued to take swipes at me, I, instead of posting again, attempted to engage with him via pm so as to challenge the points he's made. The response? He's ignored me. Not once, but three times. I've sought an explanation from him as to why, but still he refuses to respond. It's clear that he thinks (as I'd said I wouldn't post on this thread again) he can now attack me here with impunity.

[/quote']

Dry your eyes.

Some points.

Voting changes little or nothing. People have chosen not to vote in great number. Why? Because they believe (and rightly so) that whichever party sits in government' date=' not a damn thing will change.

And voting poiitical activism? lol.[/quote']

See, you are all stupid, imagine voting. Fools.

A contempt for those who do not take political action? I said nothing of the sort' date=' so would ask people not to put words in to my mouth.[/quote']

I used the word contempt but didn't attribute it to you so I guess I'm exempt from that charge of putting words in your mouth.

Most political activists do not work a job and so claim benefits? What nonsense. The folks I know who are politically active are either employed or are students.

Also' date=' activists do not take action because they crave attention, but because they have a strong sense of justice and demand change.

Those who do not vote should be permitted no voice? Rubbish. I've never voted, and have no intention of ever doing so. My voting would lend a legitimacy to a system I despise - one whose function is to serve the interests of the established order.

That's all.[/quote']

So, would you say you'd respect the opinion of someone who didn't vote and was politically active more than the opinion of someone who did but didn't really do much otherwise.

[Doc]

One post.

Angry that while I'd left this discussion' date=' Doc still then continued to take swipes at me, I, instead of posting again, and in an attemp to challenge the points he'd made, sought to engage with him via pm. The response? He's ignored me. Not once, but three times. I've sought an explanation from him as to why, but still he refuses to respond. It's clear that he thinks (as I'd said I wouldn't post on this thread again) he can now attack me here with impunity.

Some points.

Voting changes little or nothing. People have chosen not to vote in great number. Why? Because they believe (and rightly so) that whichever party sits in government, not a damn thing will change.

And voting poiitical activism? lol

A contempt for those who do not take political action? I said nothing of the sort, so would ask people not to put words in to my mouth. Said only that I respect those who do take action. Throwing insults from afar is, as I've said, easy.

Most political activists do not work a job and so claim benefits? What nonsense. The folks I know who are politically active are either employed or are students.

Also, activists do not take action because they crave attention, but because they have a strong sense of justice and demand change.

Those who do not vote should be permitted no voice? Rubbish. I've never voted, and have no intention of ever doing so. My voting would lend a legitimacy to a system I despise - one whose function is to serve the interests of the established order.

That's all.[/quote']

Firstly, let me apologise for not answering your PM. I failed to notice there were unread posts there.

Seconly I was not having a go at you. I merely said I found your attitude to those engaging in their rights which were opposed to yours restrictive and undemocratic.

And I did not say most activists are scroungers I said many are which is true.

I also did not say those who don't vote should have no voice.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

Firstly' date=' let me apologise for not answering your PM. I failed to notice there were unread posts there.

Seconly I was not having a go at you. I merely said I found your attitude to those engaging in their rights which were opposed to yours restrictive and undemocratic.

And I did not say most activists are scroungers I said many are which is true.

I also did not say those who don't vote should have no voice.[/quote']

I did not say that folks here should not be permitted a voice. I said only that that I was tired of folks here throwing insults from afar when they have had any number of opportunities to challenge directly the opinions of those they oppose. Sure, folks can express what they believe. Hell, go ahead and vote. But I am gonna have my say too.

A question. Do you know any political activists personally? No? i thought not.

Those who do not vote should have no voice? Did I attribute this remark to you? No, I did not. I was simply attempting to answer a number of the points made here by several people.

[Doc]

I did not say that folks here should not be permitted a voice. I said only that that I was tired of folks here throwing insults from afar when they have had any number of opportunities to challenge directly the opinions of those they oppose. Sure' date=' folks can express what they believe. Hell, go ahead and vote. But I am gonna have my say too.

A question. Do you know any political activists personally? No? i thought not.

Those who do not vote should have no voice? Did I attribute this remark to you? No, I did not. I was simply attempting to answer a number of the points made here by several people.[/quote']

Yes actually. My young brother is a political activist for the SSP. He has no job and is on the dole and has been for years, despite being able bodied. He also gets involed in anti hunt and anti vivsection protests. So I frequently see him and his equally parasitic friends when they drop in on their way in their untaxed and uninsured van to the next pointless protest. I suppose political activist is stretching it for him as the SSP is more of a circus act than a party.

[Guest allsystemsfail]

Yes actually. My young brother is a political activist for the SSP. He has no job and is on the dole and has been for years' date=' despite being able bodied. He also gets involed in anti hunt and anti vivsection protests. So I frequently see him and his equally parasitic friends when they drop in on their way in their untaxed and uninsured van to the next pointless protest. I suppose political activist is stretching it for him as the SSP is more of a circus act than a party.[/quote']

And so on the basis of knowing just a few individuals, you seek to damn the entire activist movement?

And pointless protest? I would disagree. I find (as an increasing number of people do) voting rather pointless.

[Doc]

And so on the basis of knowing just a few individuals' date=' you seek to damn the entire activist movement?

And pointless protest? I would disagree. I find (as an increasing number of people do) voting rather pointless.[/quote']

I do not. I also know many who do incredible work and not just in this country. I have friends who work for amnesty and others in greenpeace.

I am merely disgusted by those who are able to work but choose no to, thereby diverting resources away from the sections of society who genuinely need help and support. Of course, this government makes it easy for them to do it.