/tg/Station 13

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:08 pm**

Bottom post of the previous page:

Our boy Comrade Corbyn suggested that rich people's houses near where that tower burned down be claimed for habitation by the poor bastards whose house burned down.

[youtube]7r4ZlEQWN8o[/youtube]

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:33 pm**

The cause of the fire is pretty much irrelevant, given that a single electrical malfunction or cooking accident should not be sufficient to turn a building housing hundreds into an inferno. Freaking Space Station 13 can handle a few explosions, and it's literally built to be a death trap.

The other big issue is that housing affordability in London has gone beyond a joke, and thousands of houses are sitting empty because the owners don't want to rent them for a price anyone can afford, while the people who do the work that makes life so easy for the wealthy can barely make rent and have to rely on food banks since all their paychecks and benefits go to paying for a place to live. And the current government is the one that's been cutting funding to emergency services, calling safety regulations a waste of time and money, and is about 1/3 landlords.

Funny thing; Corbyn's suggesting using the same laws that have been used to appropriate low-cost housing for the poor, demolish it and build luxury housing, just in the opposite way.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:36 pm**

CosmicScientist wrote:But I already said they brought it up to win real life leddit karma. They can't do that. No-one's going to do that. If labour was even entirely behind that, they couldn't do anything because they have even less seats than the minority majority of tories. And you can't compare that to a crackdown on shitty landlords because no-one has been promising that. The tories are trying to pretend no-one could put a pitchfork up their backsides if the public get further agitated, labour are probably screaming into the void of media headlines and I haven't seen much from any other moderately relevant party.

But yeah it would be nice if there was a crackdown but this happened on government property and the tories half at least 80 members in the current parliament who have property available for or in rent so don't expect them to do anything without taking the iron out of the coals and putting it to their feet, especially since their political partners in northern ireland probably don't give a sod due to distance and demographics.

And that maymay vidja you shared, Shadow:
>CORBYN BAD
>CORBYN COMMUNIST, LOL, I CALLED HIM COMRADE
>CORBYN TOTALITARIAN, LOL
>CORBYN GAVE OUT CUDDLES
>CORBYN WANTS TO STEAL YOUR PROPERTY
>let's talk about how long Corbyn was down there giving CUDDLES, JESUS CHRIST, CUDDLES, HE IS A COMMUNIST but let's not talk about how long May was down there or even what she did, CUDDLES, DEAR GOD MAN, CUDDLES
What a frakking armchair political commentator. Might as well be J_Mad talking about the server and coding and how he donates tonnes to it therefore he should be steering the ship.
>"Where's the charity, chaps, come on."
Fuck me, their accent flicked up to wannabe toff for a moment there and it wasn't even ironic.

The Tories literally haven't formed a government yet, is the thing, and are clinging to power by the tips of their fingernails with a shaky alliance with a bunch of Irish fundie loons no one knew about before the election and no one likes. Labour is almost guaranteed to be in power within a few years one way or another, and even if the Conservatives manage to form government, they have the poisoned chalice of the Brexit negotiations to look forward to.

The British government system works very, very differently from the American one, in a lot of ways, though most of the media and pundits don't grasp that. Though the last few years have shown the media doesn't seem to have a good grasp on anything.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:42 pm**

Where's the alt/hard-right & UKIP when you need it eh?

In other good news, the leader of the lib dems resigned over his religious conflicting with his parties views like a reasonable politican, i wish Sadiq Khan would do the same given that with his past links does not seem to be actively doing anything about the problem and patronising the wider public, he tries but its too little too late. Love or hate Trump, the American Prez know's Sadiq's a bit of a mug and hence their social media long distance rivalry.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 5:49 pm**

What May was doing there wasn't even worth talking about because it was exactly what you would expect, she showed up, got a briefing from the EMTs about what happened, and left, later starting an investigation about what the hell happened, and likely arranging for housing to be provided soon. All reasonable moves.

Corbyn was all that was being talked about because he was acting like a lunatic, posing with a few victims for a photo op of him looking like such a good guy for thirty minutes and then leaving, later making wholly irrational and downright dangerous demands that the state should claim rich people's uninhabited houses near the fire so they could have a place to live, a move that is both totalitarian and dangerously communist.

Property rights don't evaporate when something bad happens, and if they do the rich people will just leave your country, and take their money with them.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:59 pm**

Cant leave the country if theyre dead

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:07 pm**

ShadowDimentio wrote:What May was doing there wasn't even worth talking about because it was exactly what you would expect, she showed up, got a briefing from the EMTs about what happened, and left, later starting an investigation about what the hell happened, and likely arranging for housing to be provided soon. All reasonable moves.

That's real cool of her.

But let's not forget that there was a law that got voted on in the houses of parliament about landlords having to ensure that every building has proper fire safety utilities compared to our current system of needing only a fucking fire alarm and one fire extinguisher somewhere in the building but it was voted down by about 70 conservatives.

These 70 conservatives also turned out to be land owners as well but I'm not going to say anything about that.

But yes, Theresa May has no doing in this. It was entirely the poor peoples faults for living in such a shitty building to begin with. Maybe if they used their brains and actually got a nice house this wouldn't happen el oh el!

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 9:42 pm**

ColonicAcid wrote:But yes, Theresa May has no doing in this. It was entirely the poor peoples faults for living in such a shitty building to begin with. Maybe if they used their brains and actually got a nice house this wouldn't happen el oh el!

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2017 10:49 pm**

Jesus Christ that gif is absolutely horrifying. Why would you have that.

Posted: **Sun Jun 18, 2017 12:46 am**

whoever told the people in the building to stay in the building was an absolute fucking moron

I lived in an old-ass building once, not up to code, shady landlord with poor renovation, we didn't even have a smoke detector. so inevitably the building caught on fire one day, but the fire started in the ductwork, a fact I learned when the fire department took a fucking fire axe to our front door and told us to GTFO even though it looked like our unit was going to be fine because you don't take fucking chances with a fire, you get the fuck out.

(our unit was in fact fine, the fire was mostly on the lower floors of the building. the only damage was my terrible roommate coming home and bitching about my "letting" the fire department take an axe to his bedroom door because it was locked)

Posted: **Sun Jun 18, 2017 6:53 am**

The idea was, in theory, the functioning fire prevention systems would contain the fire to its flat of origin, and a panicked evacuation could cause more harm. This being so you don't have a frantic stampede over children and the elderly every time someone spills the chips.

This theory assumes you haven't covered the building in inflammable cladding to make it less offensive to the eyes of its rich neighbours.

Posted: **Sun Jun 18, 2017 7:25 am**

A shelter-in-place strategy is fine if the firebreaks actually work like they're supposed to.

Posted: **Sun Jun 18, 2017 12:19 pm**

Does inflammable cladding means it catches on fire or not

Posted: **Sun Jun 18, 2017 12:24 pm**

50 dead in a big ass fire in central portugal.

forest fires are a given throughout the summer but this is the worst catastrophe in terms of dead since the ultramar war.

Posted: **Sun Jun 18, 2017 1:06 pm**

nope, its not pretty.

but its weird, every time im at my parents house in portugal i dont pay two shits to fire.

i can see the smoke and they're pretty big and shit but like its just a "normality" in those parts of rural portugal.

one unlucky wind direction though and that fire can go out of control and come towards their house/the entire village, and this shit happens every. single. summer.

Posted: **Sun Jun 18, 2017 1:34 pm**

Super Aggro Crag wrote:Does inflammable cladding means it catches on fire or not

You would think inflammable would be to flammable as infallible is to fallible.

But no, both words mean this shit catches fire. Actually inflammable technically means this shit really really catches fire.

Maybe whoever bought the cladding was too busy playing soggy biscuit to learn the difference.

Posted: **Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:00 pm**

That was the joke, yes.
[youtube]Q8mD2hsxrhQ[/youtube]
The trick is, it derives from 'inflame'.

Posted: **Thu Jun 22, 2017 9:49 pm**

So don't Mexicans actually like admire Speedy Gonzalez and isn't he almost always the hero in his shir?

Posted: **Fri Jun 23, 2017 7:24 am**

From all I gather, white American liberals are pretty much the only people that actually think the poncho-and-sombrero Mexican stereotype is actually significantly offensive. I get the impression to most Mexicans it's pretty similar to the American cowboy stereotype; silly and anachronistic (though with perfectly practical roots) but used anyway because it looks neat and is clearly representative of their culture.

Though as we all know, the SJW-type ilk tend to be amazingly ignorant, patronising and basically treat all non-white cultures as the same, whether they're entire countries, tribes clinging to existence, oppressed ethnic minorities or worldwide religions, and thus have a complete disconnect with what the people they supposedly protect actually think, want and need.

Posted: **Fri Jun 23, 2017 8:07 am**

Which in and of itself is super American!

Posted: **Fri Jun 23, 2017 10:18 pm**

Mexicans have admirably thick skin as a culture anyway too.

Posted: **Fri Jun 23, 2017 10:22 pm**

Majority of 1st generation immigrants have thick skin.

They can face abuse daily but they'll soldier on because they understand that the abuse they get doesn't stop the job being infinitely better paying than what they get back home.

It's only really 2nd and 3rd generation that become more and more insulted at shit like that because they don't fully understand the hardships that their parents faced in their old country and they take more pride in their culture because it's a distinguishing feature.

Posted: **Fri Jun 23, 2017 10:59 pm**

ColonicAcid wrote:Majority of 1st generation immigrants have thick skin.

They can face abuse daily but they'll soldier on because they understand that the abuse they get doesn't stop the job being infinitely better paying than what they get back home.

It's only really 2nd and 3rd generation that become more and more insulted at shit like that because they don't fully understand the hardships that their parents faced in their old country and they take more pride in their culture because it's a distinguishing feature.

But SHOULD they get insulted at shit like that? "It's worse elsewhere" is true, but not a justification for being abusive when there is an alternative available.

Posted: **Fri Jun 23, 2017 11:21 pm**

i mean in a perfect world nobody should get insulted because of their ethnicity.

but this aint a perfect world. people are going to be dickheads at people with different colour skins/different accents/different languages and the best thing you can do is soldier on and always keep on that grind.

1st generation do that significantly better than any other generation immigrant

Posted: **Sat Jun 24, 2017 12:01 am**

Betting called mean names is infinitely preferable to dying/having a shit life back in their home country.

Posted: **Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:13 am**

Yes, but the question was

Why not just not insult them?

Posted: **Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:54 am**

Because they're a pack of fucks who smell bad and shit on everyone who isn't from their trash country and ill be fucking damned if I ever take the high road and turn the other cheek.

Posted: **Sat Jun 24, 2017 3:03 am**

People like to feel powerful. Pack mentality.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:18 am**

ColonicAcid wrote: and the best thing you can do is soldier on and always keep on that grind.

I reject this claim. Being pissed off by race-based insults is necessarily a precursor to enacting change that prevents them. You've already said that it would be better if these race-based insults did not occur, so it follows that enacting the aforementioned change is desirable. Assuming that human action has some capability to influence the course of human affairs, it is therefore the case that it id desirable for these individuals to get pissed off and take action, not just take it and ignore it.

You can argue that they aren't engaging in the most effective strategy to achieve that end (which is an entirely different, and far more complicated, argument- but one that I would say ultimately doesn't matter as to the morality of actions taken in good faith), or that the 1st-generation attitude is personally advantageous, but by your own admission opposition of racial insults is a desirable course of action- and pretending they don't exist definitely isn't an effective strategy for removing them.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:30 am**

He said that calling someone a nigger is rude, and in a perfect world everyone would get along and be nice, not that Johnny Law should be empowered to burst through the door and slap the cuffs on everyone who's mildly racist or mean.

Being an asshole isn't a crime, if it were everyone's going to jail, it's just a matter of when.

Also you're never going to stomp out racism, especially not by empowering the cops to become thought police. All that does is give the spotlight to those irrelevant few that actually are racist, and turn every person the thought police drag off into martyrs.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:46 am**

ShadowDimentio wrote:He said that calling someone a nigger is rude, and in a perfect world everyone would get along and be nice, not that Johnny Law should be empowered to burst through the door and slap the cuffs on everyone who's mildly racist or mean.

Being an asshole isn't a crime, if it were everyone's going to jail, it's just a matter of when.

Also you're never going to stomp out racism, especially not by empowering the cops to become thought police. All that does is give the spotlight to those irrelevant few that actually are racist, and turn every person the thought police drag off into martyrs.

You're putting words in my mouth. I never claimed that "action to bring about change" should consist of passing laws against calling people mean names. How the hell did you arrive at that?

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:49 am**

Drynwyn wrote:I reject this claim. Being pissed off by race-based insults is necessarily a precursor to enacting change that prevents them. You've already said that it would be better if these race-based insults did not occur, so it follows that enacting the aforementioned change is desirable.

What did you mean by this besides passing laws prohibiting racism

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:50 am**

The difference is that speedy gonzales and mariachi mario aren't even insults or slurs and yet these lily-white motherfuckers have decided on mexico's behalf that it's an insulting stereotype to raise the banner against

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:53 am**

ShadowDimentio wrote:
Drynwyn wrote:I reject this claim. Being pissed off by race-based insults is necessarily a precursor to enacting change that prevents them. You've already said that it would be better if these race-based insults did not occur, so it follows that enacting the aforementioned change is desirable.
What did you mean by this besides passing laws prohibiting racism

Social and economic pressure? People don't go to jail for racist words in America but they very often lose their social standing and careers.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:57 am**

I'm actually kind of confused by your confusion. Society having ways of influencing people and exerting control outside of explicit laws is not some hidden truth, it's something everyone is generally aware of.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:00 am**

I mean yeah, "don't be an asshole" is pretty much a universal truth, I was confused because I thought he was calling for something greater than what happens already.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:03 am**

Why are you guys arguing over fucking Mariachi Mario anyway why is this thread always retarded twitter culture wars instead of anything relevant

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:05 am**

They're not arguing, some mumblefucks on twitter are assblasted because Mario had a sombrero and they're agreeing they should go get fucked.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:45 am**

ShadowDimentio wrote:I mean yeah, "don't be an asshole" is pretty much a universal truth, I was confused because I thought he was calling for something greater than what happens already.

I would say that "what happens already" is the result of people not having the "thick skinned" attitude earlier proclaimed as beneficial. But saying "the ongoing process of social pressures is effective" is not the same as saying "racism solved", as part of that ongoing process involves continued attempts to exert and broaden that social pressure.

Additionally, I think there is room to exert more consistent social pressures, rather than some particular incident, selected more-or-less at random, getting brigaded by the internet.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:48 am**

Yeah, that's definitely a thing. There's an all-or nothing between nobody giving a shit, or occasionally something relatively minor will be picked up on by tumblr/twitter and immediately the shrieking hordes will demand no less than this person be sacked from their job and be made a social pariah, at least until the next outrage attracts their attention.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 4:28 am**

People's lives are ruined after they find themselves on the wrong end of the twitter outrage mobs, and you want them to do MORE?

The punishment should fit the crime, and mob justice is rarely ever fair.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 5:01 am**

ShadowDimentio wrote:People's lives are ruined after they find themselves on the wrong end of the twitter outrage mobs, and you want them to do MORE?

The punishment should fit the crime, and mob justice is rarely ever fair.

You need to read my posts more carefully. I said there was room for more CONSISTENT social pressure. That doesn't mean extending twitter outrage mobs to everyone- it means a less extreme response, to more instances of problematic behavior. For example, if people started calling out instances of problematic behavior with people in their own social circles rather than internet strangers.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 5:30 am**

They do. If someone's being a dick, someone will most of the time say "hey stop being a dick", and then things go from there.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:12 am**

Problem is most of the people who cause actual harm to people out of hatred or disdain for something they can't help are the ones too powerful, connected and wealthy for Twitter mobs to do much or even notice, especially when you use the right words. Modern 'social justice' especially goes after the lowest hanging fruit it can find, and soulless corporations have found that sending someone to march in a Pride parade is a get out of jail free card for horrible shit, probably literally.

Mob justice just catches the bigots dumb enough not to use the right dog-whistles. Though it seems like there's more and more of those these days as the upper classes seem as disconnected from reality and social awareness as chan addicts. I mean, look at the Tories over in England shitting their pants repeatedly over how apparently almost all lower-class housing was decorated with literally flammable cladding as an excuse to raise rents. They're literally evacuating hundreds of people from these deathtraps, and are struggling to find places to put them, while the rich whine about having to accommodate the poor.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 12:29 pm**

Yeah, it fucks their housing prices so their million and a half home is worth a lot less.

They'll probably just do what they've always done and ship them north.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 12:40 pm**

Problem is London is having the same problem as San Fran; the whole city's come to cater to the rich, to the point where the people actually doing the catering can't afford to live anywhere near their jobs doing so, so it's either 2 hour commutes or go to food banks because your pay is all eaten by rent. That the little affordable housing reluctantly given over to the non-ultra-rich is an utter deathtrap, while thousands of houses stand empty and never even visited by their foreign billionaire owners, is just icing on the cake.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:21 pm**

Kill the rich

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:24 pm**

eat the rich, kill the poor
get it right

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 2:55 pm**

Eating the poor is better

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:06 pm**

Less nutrient content.

Posted: **Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:29 pm**

CosmicScientist wrote:Correction. The rich whine about the potential of accommodating the poor near them. I haven't read the quotes but there's been referrals to delusion.

You're probably thinking of the rich complaining about how Corbyn suggested that the government should seize rich people's property near the fire and house the poor in there.

/tg/Station 13

2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/

Re: 2k17 /pol/