@richposting.bsky.social
It would have been far better in 2010 to have wildly extreme Milei and Keynes-like camps face off rather than a national broadcaster tell the nation that the economy worked like a household.
November 11, 2025 at 10:52 AM
It would have been far better in 2010 to have wildly extreme Milei and Keynes-like camps face off rather than a national broadcaster tell the nation that the economy worked like a household.
A huge part of where we are today is downstream from austerity, which was a canonical example of the BBC creating a single source of untruth about economics which has had disastrous consequences.
November 11, 2025 at 10:47 AM
A huge part of where we are today is downstream from austerity, which was a canonical example of the BBC creating a single source of untruth about economics which has had disastrous consequences.
The characteristics that are supposed to make the BBC a bullwark to populism - it being an undemocratic, hegemonic, establishment view - very quickly become a serious problem when it's opening the door and inviting fascism in.
November 11, 2025 at 10:45 AM
The characteristics that are supposed to make the BBC a bullwark to populism - it being an undemocratic, hegemonic, establishment view - very quickly become a serious problem when it's opening the door and inviting fascism in.
I think this third element of smug liberal incompetence is *massively* underrated as a causal element of where we've ended up.
November 10, 2025 at 9:35 PM
I think this third element of smug liberal incompetence is *massively* underrated as a causal element of where we've ended up.
I found this a weirdly good piece in capturing what it feels like to observe politics as a person who is stupid.
November 7, 2025 at 2:22 PM
I found this a weirdly good piece in capturing what it feels like to observe politics as a person who is stupid.
This matters because the "We need more Mamdanis" thinkpieces likely miss the point. We probably have them already - the thing to fix (even more in the UK) is the system which ensures they can't access platforms.
November 3, 2025 at 5:14 PM
This matters because the "We need more Mamdanis" thinkpieces likely miss the point. We probably have them already - the thing to fix (even more in the UK) is the system which ensures they can't access platforms.
He's a great candidate, with a great campaign, but the unique thing here was a confluence of events which meant the party couldn't successfully filter him out.
November 3, 2025 at 5:14 PM
He's a great candidate, with a great campaign, but the unique thing here was a confluence of events which meant the party couldn't successfully filter him out.
Possible to do both, and in honesty the cause of both problems is the same (the current Labour leadership)
September 26, 2025 at 7:13 PM
Possible to do both, and in honesty the cause of both problems is the same (the current Labour leadership)
We are also glossing over the people who don't have citizenship, and now have to carry a digital ID saying so.
September 26, 2025 at 12:45 PM
We are also glossing over the people who don't have citizenship, and now have to carry a digital ID saying so.
I'm not opposed to people with British citizenship having documentation of that fact. You can have that without every person of every immigration status being required to carry a compulsory digital ID.
September 26, 2025 at 12:43 PM
I'm not opposed to people with British citizenship having documentation of that fact. You can have that without every person of every immigration status being required to carry a compulsory digital ID.
This still isn't an argument to do a big piece of infrastructure that will definitely make it easier.
September 26, 2025 at 12:36 PM
This still isn't an argument to do a big piece of infrastructure that will definitely make it easier.
It's a failure of imagination to not be recognise real risks attached to compulsory ID in 2025 - and lazy to put it on part with anti-vaxism. I'm entirely able to see the potential benefits - I used to support the idea prior to rise of the far-right. You don't seem prepared for what's coming.
September 26, 2025 at 12:35 PM
It's a failure of imagination to not be recognise real risks attached to compulsory ID in 2025 - and lazy to put it on part with anti-vaxism. I'm entirely able to see the potential benefits - I used to support the idea prior to rise of the far-right. You don't seem prepared for what's coming.
We can roll back the requirement to present ID when voting if that's a concern - and the other benefits are the ones I'm claiming are outweighed by the risks in enabling persecution.
September 26, 2025 at 12:14 PM
We can roll back the requirement to present ID when voting if that's a concern - and the other benefits are the ones I'm claiming are outweighed by the risks in enabling persecution.
Sounds like we don't need the card then!
September 26, 2025 at 12:05 PM
Sounds like we don't need the card then!
1. The immigration argument is the one the Government proposing the card is making
2. It's the specific risk posed by the likely incoming Government
3. It's not credible to say the card will make state action faster and more efficient but only when used for good!
2. It's the specific risk posed by the likely incoming Government
3. It's not credible to say the card will make state action faster and more efficient but only when used for good!
September 26, 2025 at 12:00 PM
1. The immigration argument is the one the Government proposing the card is making
2. It's the specific risk posed by the likely incoming Government
3. It's not credible to say the card will make state action faster and more efficient but only when used for good!
2. It's the specific risk posed by the likely incoming Government
3. It's not credible to say the card will make state action faster and more efficient but only when used for good!
Sorry, but it's not credible to say that Reform winning an election (backed by all currently available polling) is as likely as an Alien invasion. You must see that.
September 26, 2025 at 11:55 AM
Sorry, but it's not credible to say that Reform winning an election (backed by all currently available polling) is as likely as an Alien invasion. You must see that.
1. No-one is arguing racist, authoritarian Governments couldnt do this - the point is whether we make it easier by doing it for them
2. It's not credible to say that if the US had a compulsory digital ID, ICE would not be using it to good effect.
3. I'm not willing to gamble on Reform flaming out.
2. It's not credible to say that if the US had a compulsory digital ID, ICE would not be using it to good effect.
3. I'm not willing to gamble on Reform flaming out.
September 26, 2025 at 11:53 AM
1. No-one is arguing racist, authoritarian Governments couldnt do this - the point is whether we make it easier by doing it for them
2. It's not credible to say that if the US had a compulsory digital ID, ICE would not be using it to good effect.
3. I'm not willing to gamble on Reform flaming out.
2. It's not credible to say that if the US had a compulsory digital ID, ICE would not be using it to good effect.
3. I'm not willing to gamble on Reform flaming out.
Again I feel like a broken record but we are talking about what could be done with the system by a racist, authoritarian Government. I really don't know how to make this clearer.
September 26, 2025 at 11:42 AM
Again I feel like a broken record but we are talking about what could be done with the system by a racist, authoritarian Government. I really don't know how to make this clearer.
My objection is it makes it easier for a racist authoritarian, government to persecute minorities when a compulsory digital identity card is integrated across state functions - and that we polling suggests we are going to have a Government like this.
September 26, 2025 at 11:42 AM
My objection is it makes it easier for a racist authoritarian, government to persecute minorities when a compulsory digital identity card is integrated across state functions - and that we polling suggests we are going to have a Government like this.
You cannot compel people to carry identity they don't have. By definition a compulsory digital identity - the proposal we're discussing - is one they must have. That in turn makes it easy to compel them to carry it.
September 26, 2025 at 11:28 AM
You cannot compel people to carry identity they don't have. By definition a compulsory digital identity - the proposal we're discussing - is one they must have. That in turn makes it easy to compel them to carry it.
Sure, my specific concerns are what the capacity enables once built. I personally am wary of how to weight the benefits that might accure under good Governments with the harms it could facilitate by a bad one, esp as that looks likely.
September 26, 2025 at 11:25 AM
Sure, my specific concerns are what the capacity enables once built. I personally am wary of how to weight the benefits that might accure under good Governments with the harms it could facilitate by a bad one, esp as that looks likely.