Looks like Platform 10 has now launched. This is the site that has been euphemistically called CameroonHome. The site says it wants to make the case for a "modern, liberal Conservative agenda." Frankly, I think it's looks fugly, but then I'm a picky git, I shall have a browse around its content though and will be bookmarking it.
Hat Tip: Mike Rouse
"THe site says it wants to make the case for a "modern, liberal Conservative agenda.""
Isn't that sort of playing right into the hands, of those who claim Cameron is a Liberal not a Conservative?
No, because a Liberal and a liberal are no more the same than a Conservative and a conservative are. It's the difference between a noun and a set of values in political philosophy. You know, like the fact that we live in a liberal democracy.
I suppose it would be playing into their hands if they were a bit thick though and couldn't distinguish between nouns and concepts.
Thanks for the explanation Dizzy.
Seems quite a good idea to present a real alternative to an authoritarian Socialist Government. They just have to convince the electorate that being told what to do all the time is not a good thing.
Our democracy is liberal? You think? Isn't a liberal democracy one where the will of the majority does not take precedence over the freedom of the individual? Ours could once have been called a liberal democracy but now that it is dominated by the busybody thinking of intellectual pygmies like Hazel Blears it is nothing more than the tyranny of the majority.
PS: it is important to point out that in calling Hazel Blears an intellectual pygmy, I referred to the size of her intellect. Otherwise this might be interpreted as a compliment.
Thatcher descibed herself as a liberal and obviously she is very popular in the Conservatives.
It all depends what the country needs at the time. It is perfectly right and normal for politics to change to suit the mood of the nation.
Come on Tom, you know what I meant.
Will Mr C be reading this blog, as it's linked from the site ? If so, will comments be edited if I point out why his party are currently unelectable ? My spelling is terrible so I hope he doesn't mind.
Well, let's see whether my opinions make it through. And I stress that they are my opinions and observations, and I believe them to be true whether or not you agree. That's speaking up for you!
Firstly, Mr C, it is widely perceived that you jump from one bang-wagon to another in a frantic effort to please all of the people. STOP IT NOW !! If you have to hop around, try doing it a little less and then you won't be lost in the blur.
Secondly, and this one is from my flat mate, the numerous comments about how we need to reinforce the family structure seem a bit homophobic. Maybe you should make it explicitly clear whether you're including families with same-sex parents or not.
And finally, George Osbourne. It's just simply that; the man makes your party unelectable. Every single time I've seen him interviewed, he's on the defensive, even about things for which he's not being criticised. People like that will never be trusted, and are of little value because they spend more time fighting their corner than actually getting on with the job.
Fix those things, stop trying to be all things to all people, and I might just vote for you.
Tom Paine - Tee hee.
Meanwhile, Cameron spins on. He has a new "architect" for developing his programme. Surely this is the point of having a leader? He should be building the structure of the Tory programme on his beliefs and vision, not hiring an "architect" to do it for him. One more example of him utterly misapprehending his job (not saving the Third World; not saving the planet from imaginary MMGW,but saving Britain from fascistic socialism).
Yesterday's Telegraph had a photo of this fool walking through a flood somewhere, in a suit, and what is utterly embarrassing is, he was bending his knees to make the water look deeper that it was.
Anonymous 2:37 - I'm getting fed up with the illiterate usage of "homophobic", which is a non-word. Have you every studied Greek or Latin? Probably not.
Homo sapiens is Latin for 'mankind'. A phobia is an irrational fear. Are you accusing the Conservative Party of having an irrational fear of mankind?
This is psychobabble. People who want to dignify a physical or psychological complaint and make it sound legitimate always give it a Greek or Latin word. Dyslexic. See? It must be real; it has a Greek name! Anorexic. Ditto. "Homophobic" was made up by a bunch of not overly-literate activists. It means zero.
I see Platform 10 - and I don't understand the title - stresses "green". The only people who care about "green" are politicians who think the average person gives a monkey's plus Grauniad readers.
I know it's beta but...
It doesn't look very nice, there's no RSS feed, it's all too faceless; just who is behind this? It feels too serious, if it was clever it would reach out to those blogs who're constructively critical of the Tory party like Pickled Politics....
It just feels a little 'flat' and lacking in appeal.
Plus it's completely unnecessary. There are professional blogs out there, like this one and Iain's, that are better designed and have livelier content and a lively, informed exchange of views.
Platform 10 - what does the name mean? Something to do with Number 10? - is flatfooted and the layout is too dense.
Verity - I'm sorry that you felt the need to lecture me about the use of language in such a hostile way. Perhaps your life is such that you have to take issue with language that is in common use. But you failed to mention whether you agree with my opinions. I would actually be interested to know your views, as you seem articulate if maybe prone to misdirecting your ire.
Verity - sorry, I forgot to add. A phobia is an irrational fear OR dislike. I vaguely recall the creationists dropping part of a definition too, an important part which, when missed, could be used to prove the theory proposed, but otherwise disproves it.
By the by, I would suggest that the full definition of homophobia seems true of the Conservative Party, given it's form.
Anonymous 9:26 - "Verity - I'm sorry that you felt the need to lecture me about the use of language in such a hostile way."
Language is all we have to communicate in, and our English language is precise. You will never make a convincing case by using language you don't understand.
According to Partridge, phobos comes from the Greek phobia, meaning "dread, a strong fear, a fear-determined aversion".
This has nothing to do with the illiterate "homo [from homo sapiens] phobic, purporting to, without reference to logic, mean an irrational fear of "gay men". It is not the same root. It just sounded credible to the BBC and Guardian apparachiks, that's all, and then it got embedded. This is moron-speak and I am sick of it.
I am not lecturing you in "a hostile way". I am dismissing your use of my language in a hostile way.
I'm sick of illiterates bullying the general population into agreeing with imaginary definitions of words under threat of appearing "prejudiced". There are plenty of highly educated, aware, gay men who speak our language impeccably and with great wit. Couldn't you consult one of them?
"Perhaps your life is such that you have to take issue with language that is in common use." Awwwwwww .... here we go! Try to make the other poster, whose arguments you are not equipped to answer, appear sad and needy. You have, if I may say so without offence, a very trite mindset. Perhaps my "life is such" that I am sick of lefty poseurs.
I'm sick of every little special minority interest group working to get its agenda nailed into national law. What next? Special tax-funded nail strengthening camps for women with weak nails and having weak nails damages their self-esteem?
For a gay man, you certainly do lack wit and fizz.
The incidence of gays across all the races and all the continents is a steady, mas o menos, 4%. Of those, many change partners very frequently indeed, some change partners occasionally and some form stable relationships. What is the percentage of that four percent who form stable relationships?
Further, what is the percentage of that percentage of four percent who want to adopt a child? Minute. Yet you want your agenda hammered into British law.
We've got a threat to build houses for unwanted immigrants who have no stake in our ancient country on English floodplains: we've got open borders, against the will of the British electorate; we have barely qualified islamic doctors attempting to bomb Glasgow Airport: in today's news we have a tiny, ancient lady of 108 who has been told she'll have to wait for 18 months to get a hearing aid on the NHS - "the envy of the world" - and we are being denied a vote as to whether we wish to cede our sovereignty to Brussels and you are trying to push a law allowing an infinitessimal number of gays to adopt an abused/damaged child?
Are you out of your mind?
Anonymous 9:26 - you write: "A phobia is an irrational fear OR dislike."
No. It's not.
You cannot change definitions of a language long dead. A phobia means what "phobia" means according to the ancient Greek, not what a bunch of gays would like it to mean 2,000 years later.
You have to stay within the boundaries. Example, you write: "By the by, I would suggest that the full definition of homophobia seems true of the Conservative Party, given it's form." No. Because you have defined the "full" definition, according to your fantasies, not etymology.
I couldn't care less what you think of the Conservatives. You're a bedsit/council flat person and have no drive to go further under your own steam. You are not trying to build up a business and create wealth.
You are trying to force the entire British state to turn according to your will and give you a damaged child (because no other would be up for adoption)to make you feel like "a father" and so you can play families with your flatmate.
I am opposed to enabling this fantasy.
That's telling the bugger.
Hmm ok but there's no denying homophobic is in common usage. Language changes irrespective of the original meaning.
e.g: cynic - has the Greek meaning dog-like.
It is not strictly logical to describe a philosophical outlook in canine terms just because the original protagonists happened to be ascetic.
True, you can't change the ancient Greek meaning but that doesn't mean future generations won't use the word to mean something completely different.
True, Guido Faux, but based on ignorance. They thought "homo" must be all about them and they ignorantly colonised it! They had their own word for people who didn't like them. Yawn. (I didn't know that about cynic, btw.)
My point is, this is the level of ignorance that wants to take a damaged child - a child who has lost its parents; a child whose mother is in prison; a child who has been taken into care because of horrendous abuse and neglect - and use that little disturbed individual as an accessory.
This perturbs me. From what I have read, newly adopted children have a hard enough time when they're adopted into a straightforward man/woman family possibly with another child or two in it. They get abused at school ("Your parents didn't want you, that's why you had to get adopted",etc. Children, as we know, are cruel.) The child has a hard enough time adjusting to a new family and a new set of circumstances and learning a new set of characters and rules. How much worse if this child is placed in a household with "two daddies".
How wounding would the school teasing be then? How infinitely more for this fragile individual to have to adjust to. Even on a practical level, do you think any of their new schoolmates' parents are going to let their own children go and play with them after school in a house that has "two daddies" in it?
The only exception I might make in my opinion might be if the child was a 13 or 14 year old boy who knew he was gay. Living with two gay men might be a comfort. I don't know. But otherwise, no.
Can't say I disagree, but I have a problem with the State imposing majority views, never mind minority ...
ps The homo- actually homos prefix means same as in homonym, homophone, homosexual etc. And it's Greek AFAIK, not Latin which would make more sense when paired with the Greek phobia
Meanwhile back on topic: It's interesting there is no blue on platform10.
We have a kind of aquamarine (blue mixed with green) and purple (blue mixed with red).
Read into that what you will.
Actually, Guido Faux, I had always assumed it was the Green 'omos, because it makes much more sense, but someone berated me about it once and I thought, "Oooh, errr. Perhaps they're right."
But certainly, homonym, homophone make more sense. Homophobia would mean "fear of the same". In fact,I once wrote that you couldn't be afraid of "the same" (or you could, but you would have to be a screaming basket case).
Nevertheless, it's an ignorant, pretentious usage and I am fed-up with people dressing up their obsessions in ancient Greek-based words and thinking that lends credence to their pet obsessions.
Why can't gays just say "anti-homosexual"? Doesn't sound complicated and academic enough is my guess. Doesn't sound enough like a medical condition. I'm sick of all this crap.
Also, what does Platform 10 actually mean? When the train pulls out of the station, it leaves Platform 10 behind.
What does it all mean?
What does it all mean?
I suspect it means the domain name was available. Nothing more.
Post a Comment