What is it with racist settler colonists that they love their triumphalist parades so much? Are they just bad people?

Capitalist realism is a hell of a cult.

It’s probably some derivative of the maratime slang pipe-down.

Pipe down: A boatswain or ‘bosun’ was a ship’s officer who was, amongst other duties, in charge of the crew. He would issue different orders to crew members by changing the sound patterns blown on his ‘call’, a sort of high-pitched whistle.

‘Pipe down’ was the last order of the day for off-duty crew to stop talking, settle down or go to bed. Today, the phrase ‘pipe down’ is still used to tell someone to be quiet.

If an officer is piping orders the expectation would be for you to pay attention.

The second world war and its huge naval population probably brought the much older term into American slang.

So the title should say that right wing and centrist sources are less factual than left wing ones.

A general strike is your only hand. So start prepping for that.

My partner would have been haggling that vendor down to a £1.

This is the big problem with centrist media fact checkers: paltering doesn’t count towards the tallying of deceptions.

Oh sorry it’s not politically expedient to save the environment. All we understand is the orthodoxy of neo-liberal economic dogma where increasing inequality is the goal. So what we can offer you is a third runway at Heathrow.

deleted by creator

They’d just ‘devide’ up their businesses into a chain of symbiotic entities defined by paygrade. Then the executive level can enrich itself insulated from us front line grunts.

Devide

verb

Obsolete form of divide.

deleted by creator

Oh look, here comes FlyingSquid.

I could swear I heard that whole ACER laptop angle a couple of months ago on someone else’s podcast. I don’t want to say verbatim but I was having severe dejayvu. It wasn’t a Doctorow podcast that much I’m sure.

This should be a surprise to no one. Torys have controlled the political content of the BBC News for decades.

This is a bit of context from the Dec 6th edition of Private Eye.

Statistics can help decern impact. But I think there’s always going this be some measure of subjectivity no matter which way you try to call it.

Intensity isn’t a specific enough criteria. It has to be impact.

There needs to be a reasonable degree to which interference with an election should be weathered (not ignored but the process to continue). Elections are very costly and disruptive. It would be insane to redo an entire election because you found that one person voted twice. The point at which you do redo it needs to be cognizant of the degree of disruption caused.