I struggled to understand his Brexit stance - a bit like Mick Lynch. Something about EU membership preventing future nationalisation.

I’m more interested in his other international views… though I should really just look it up.

Which ones? Genuinely interested.

That’s probably the best way of dealing with it.

That’s one of the issues, isn’t it? I recently found someone who only responded to comments about Margaret Thatcher, challenging negative comments about her. This person’s history went back years and ALL of the comments (thousands!) only challenged negative ones about her. It could have been a bot, of course, but if real, it was a pretty weird way of engaging online. That goes beyond contrarianism, it’s some sort of “distributed sealioning” maybe?

It’s a hard one, though. I’ve found myself challenging someone who then avoids answering and making other similarly unsupported points… eventually you learn that it’s a waste of time. Equally, you don’t want to leave their comments out there unchallenged.

How can you tell good faith from bad faith?

For instance, can you tell if this question is asked in good faith or not? These things seem very hard know.

Seems to me that’s the point of it: to stop people asking questions in good faith and then persisting on challenging lies and disinformation.

You’ll forgive me but that’s not evidence of a “crank” (unless “crank” simply refers to anyone who doesn’t share your views). You made the assertion that Murray’s “been many many times more discredited than proven correct”. As I said, I’m happy to have my opinion of Murray changed but you’ve not provided any evidence other than a Wikipedia page which doesn’t seem to show he was “discredited” in the way you think it does. He has some opinions which many people don’t share (Salisbury and Starmer come to mind) but, generally, he appears to me to have stood up for some righteous causes (Assange, Palestine, the influence of oligarchs on Brtitish politicians).

Can you give evidence for your “crank” assertion and that he’s been discredited? I’ve followed Murray over the last 5 or so years and I’ve not noticed misinformation. He’s pretty much on the other side of things than mainstream political opinion but usually what he asserts tends to be the case. But happy to corrected and informed by evidence.

Keep searching Youtube. It’s been put up and taken down a couple if times already. It’ll be put back up again.

Spank that tank!

Snore. Just woken up?

Pro patria mori, my friend. Pro patria mori. Go in peace.

Family. Country. Flag. King. Sunday dinner. The village green. Fish & Chips. God. Now that’s patriotism. Who wouldn’t want a bloodbath to save all that from the fiendish Enemies of England who eat babies and don’t speak the King’s English and whose leader is insane?

Do you mean nazis or German soldiers? There is - if you know your history - quite a difference. But, to answer your question, yes. A bit like British conscripts going off to fight and it being drilled into them to follow orders along with the threat of being shot if they didn’t follow orders. You seem to forget that the Allies also committed terrible atrocities on the European mainland in both wars. I don’t think ordinary people - German, Russian or British - are inherently evil and bloodthirsty in the way you seem to. But I do think that tools like propaganda and patriotism can be used to manipulate and coerce.

A bit like all those young men slaughtered in the World Wars (and about every war, really). When the lord of the manor or the king or your priest tells you to sign up and fight, you fight to defend their property. When foreign armies invade, they’re not after the houses and property of the poor or to take over local communities for some vague reason. They’re commanded to go after after the land and property of the rich (for their king or oligarch). It’s not hard to understand that. But, as you say, you go and do you and die for your abstract country, king and god.

Then who triggered the invasion? A whole race of evil Russians who do it because… because… they’re evil Russians? I don’t think so.

Wars are always caused by the ruling classes whether oligarchs, millionaires, aristocrats or whomever. They don’t end up fighting but leave it up to the ordinary people to give their lives. Those Ukrainians dying are certainly not the rich. Ukrainian rich are all in places like the South of France and LA.

Not quite sure what point you’re trying to make but maybe read what I wrote with a little more care perhaps?

Blue Labour are turning out to be a bit like Farage and Reform. The right-wing media will give them a platform out of all proportion with their actual support… until they’ve had so much coverage that their support catches up. Every time the govt say something they’ll be a Blue Labour comment.

It’s that old idea that you can build weapons in order to get yourself out of an economic crisis. Didn’t seem to work in the run-up to 1914 or 1939 and I doubt it’ll work this time either. But it’ll distract the ordinary man or woman on the Clapham Omnibus from realising how shit everything is.