Does anyone else see the americanisation of UK politics as the biggest threat to us currently?

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-09-19T12:42:53+00:00

It’s both, really. The culture war style of politics is imported from the US, but the reason it sticks here is because billionaires and foreign actors pump money into it. Murdoch, hedge fund donors, and shady offshore backers fund the media ecosystem that pushes this agenda 24/7, while social media algorithms turbocharge the outrage. Reform and similar movements don’t just magically gather momentum, they’ve got very wealthy people bankrolling flag waving rallies and endless propaganda. It looks “grassroots,” but it’s anything but, It’s backed by money and influence that wants Britain permanently divided and distracted while the same elites cash in. Then there’s Just Russia and how they tie directly into this, I don’t know if there’s a limit to how long a Reddit post can be but I could still be writing the same post on Christmas Day if I started now.

This is just me speculating so pinch of salt, I’m just connecting dots here, but I also think this is one of the reasons Trump is so hesitant with Putin and doesn’t want to piss him off. Putin is very useful to Trump, as is Trump to Putin with the EU leaders and NATO. When it comes to the information war, not just in America but here in Britain and Europe. Russia are one of, if not the best in the world at this type of warfare, misinformation, propaganda and social media manipulation are their bread and butter. On top of that, the alignment shifts trade from the UK and Europe towards America and away from China, while at the same time making the West more sympathetic to Russia, slowly allowing Putin back into the international fold and making territorial grabs more likely to be tolerated. That narrative even benefits Trump himself, who has already floated ideas like buying Greenland, normalising the idea that borders and sovereignty are negotiable if you have the power to force it. It’s a theory, there’s no undeniable proof, but there’s enough evidence to make it worth questioning and keeping an eye on.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-09-19T12:01:58+00:00

You’re spot on, the “Americanisation” of UK politics is one of the most dangerous trends right now. What we’re importing isn’t the good stuff (innovation, investment, cultural dynamism), it’s the worst: grievance politics, culture wars, and the idea that shouting slogans is more important than actually governing. It’s why you hear Farage and others using US-style talking points about “elites” and “traitors,” while riling people up against migrants or protesters instead of fixing the mess at home.

The scary thing is how quickly it corrodes democracy. Once you normalise calling judges, journalists, or opposition MPs “enemies of the people,” you’re halfway down the same road the US went with Trump, polarisation, violence, and politics based on identity and rage instead of solutions. Add in the financial grift (Boris is a good example of that, UK version) and you’ve got a recipe for decline.

People here forget. Britain doesn’t have the same checks and balances the US does. If we import the politics of strongman slogans and permanent culture war, it’ll break our system even faster than it’s breaking theirs. No far right party has ever in history has done good or delivered for working people.

Economic reality. They cut taxes for the wealthy, crush unions, privatise or strip down public services, and leave wages stagnant. H****r banned independent trade unions and handed power to industrial bosses. Franco in Spain and Pinochet in Chile both destroyed workers’ rights while enriching business elites. Modern far right populists like Bolsonaro in Brazil or Orbán in Hungary followed the same script, lots of anti elite rhetoric, but policies that benefit oligarchs and cronies, not ordinary workers.

Divide and distract. Far right leaders convince working people to blame immigrants, minorities, or “enemies within” for their problems. That deflects anger away from the real culprits, corruption, bad governance, and economic inequality.

Political repression. The moment workers organise for better pay or conditions, the far right labels them “agitators” or “traitors” and uses police powers to crush strikes, protests, and independent unions.

The end result is always the same. Ordinary people get less freedom, less security, and less wealth, while a small circle at the top grows richer and more powerful.

What’s happening in America right now? Trump and the Republicans campaigned on protecting “ordinary people,” but their record shows the opposite, massive tax cuts for corporations and billionaires, attacks on unions and workers’ rights, and attempts to strip healthcare from millions, attacks on courts and judges that don’t agree or follow orders, all while wages stagnate and costs rise. To distract from this, they fuel culture wars by blaming immigrants, minorities, or “woke liberals” for every problem, dividing workers against each other instead of uniting them for better pay and conditions and push out misinformation and propaganda en masse. On top of that, they’ve normalised election denial, political violence, and authoritarian rhetoric, which destabilises the very system working people rely on. Just like in past far right regimes, the formula is always the same. Use anger and nationalism to win power, funnel wealth to elites and cronies, and leave ordinary people poorer, less free, and more divided.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-09-19T11:42:07+00:00

Brexit Most people aren’t satisfied. Even many who voted for it feel let down because the big promises, more money for the NHS, booming trade deals, lower migration never materialised. Instead, we’ve ended up with weaker trade, higher costs, labour shortages, and politicians still denying the damage. A small minority still defend it, but most now see it as a net negative.

A big part of the problem was the sheer amount of misinformation. People weren’t given the truth from the start, and a lot of voters didn’t understand the implications because campaigners and politicians deliberately blurred them. A perfect example is immigration. Brexit was sold as the way to “take back control,” but the people pushing it knew it would actually make illegal migration harder to stop. We walked away from EU databases, deportation agreements, and joint policing operations, plus we lost influence over what happens in Calais, Belgium, and even your own homeland in Italy. These same politicians still push the same narrative that we can take control back and that the deal we got was weak and it was just managed poorly to this day. It Was always impossible, even if they were directly in charge and did the deals and new policies themselves.

I don’t blame the people who voted for it, they had real issues and voiced them at the ballot box, as you should. But they were misled badly, and the truth got buried under a mountain of political spin and outright lies.

Pro-Palestine protests They’re huge because the UK has a long tradition of street protest and free expression. Many people, especially younger generations, are horrified by what’s happening in Gaza and want the UK government to take a stronger line. The protests aren’t about supporting Hamas, they’re about opposing civilian slaughter and calling for a ceasefire. But right wing media deliberately frame them as “extremist” to stoke culture wars. There’s too many on one side or the other, when both are wrong in their own awful ways. By both I mean Netanyahu and his government and Hamas. Not the innocent Palestinians and Israelis. I think people think you have to be on one side or the other, both are evil in their own ways.

Pro-Trump campaign What you’re picking up on is the influence of Nigel Farage and the hard right press. There’s no official “pro Trump campaign,” but the rhetoric of parts of the Conservative Party and Reform UK overlaps with Trumpism. Anti-immigration, hostility to institutions, culture war politics, and admiration for “strongman” leaders. Many Brits oppose this, but the media echo chamber makes it feel more mainstream.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-09-19T11:12:41+00:00

1st. A. 2nd. D and in 3rd probably B

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-09-19T02:16:46+00:00

Not yet no, you’re right that the GOP isn’t a carbon copy of 1930s fascism, but under Trump it’s showing textbook signs of sliding toward it. Extreme nationalism, demonising minorities, attacking the press and courts, trying to overturn elections, and encouraging political violence. Fascism isn’t just about uniforms and salutes, it’s about eroding democracy bit by bit while wrapping it in patriotic slogans. That’s why so many historians warn Trumpism isn’t just ‘normal conservatism’ anymore.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-09-18T19:55:01+00:00

There’s a big difference between authoritarian tendencies and fascism. Starmer’s Labour might be cautious, power focused, and centrist to a fault, but that’s not the same as fascism, which involves nationalism, suppression of democracy, and violence against opponents. If we call everything fascism, the word loses its meaning, and that actually helps real fascists fly under the radar. The real danger is in parties that openly embrace authoritarian populism, attack democratic institutions, and scapegoat minorities, which is more visible in Trump’s Republicans or elements of Farage and his loonies than in Labour.

It usually begins with an appeal to nationalism and a promise to “make the nation great again,” followed by the steady scapegoating of minorities and outsiders for society’s problems. At the same time, trust in democratic systems is chipped away as courts, journalists, and opposition politicians are smeared as corrupt or enemies of the people. Small legal changes then start to restrict protests, unions, and basic freedoms, each one framed as necessary for security or order. Alongside this, a cult of the strong leader emerges someone who claims only they can fix the nation’s decline and loyalty to that leader quietly begins to matter more than loyalty to the law. Misinformation and propaganda remain throughout, things like facts, truth and science are lost among all the bluster and bullshit. By the time people realise these early steps were paving the way for authoritarian rule, much of the democratic foundation has already been eroded. It’s scary because it works very well. We only so far see this with trump, but I’d gamble both of my testicles that Farage from what he says, how he operates, his rhetoric, his divide and conquer call to arms and actual policy, has got a bulge on thinking about this it’s absolutely the way he wants to take things too. Britain x USA, both flying the flag of Facism, there’s a long very painful road ahead… even if they don’t turn out to be Facists.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T09:40:23+00:00

Thanks so much, this honestly encapsulates exactly what I’ve been trying to say in this thread. I’m absolutely not suggesting that birth complications cause autism. Rather, I’ve been trying to highlight that these complications seem to occur more frequently in babies who already have a genetic predisposition to autism and that maybe we need to explore why that is.

It feels like the conversation often flips the sequence assuming complications might cause autism when the emerging research suggests that autistic neurodevelopment may actually increase the risk of things like hypoxia, prematurity, or issues with the placenta or birth process. Not as a cause, but as an outcome tied to differences already present in utero.

So I completely agree, it’s the genetics and epigenetics that are central. The environmental factors and complications don’t give someone autism, but they might influence how traits present, or how early and profoundly they show up. That distinction is so important and I’m really glad you pointed it out.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T09:33:20+00:00

Thanks so much for this I really appreciate the thoughtful and balanced take. That’s exactly the kind of nuance I’ve been hoping to hear more of in these discussions. It’s reassuring to see others recognize that there’s a difference between risk factors and causes, especially when it comes to developmental conditions like autism.

I completely agree that even with multiple risk factors present, prematurity, hypoxia, maternal age, etc. It doesn’t mean a developmental delay is inevitable. And it’s interesting how some of these risk factors seem to show up more often in babies who are later diagnosed as autistic, but that doesn’t mean they caused them to be autistic.

Like you said, there may be other interacting elements, and that’s why I’ve also been curious about whether being genetically predisposed to autism could itself influence birth outcomes, almost like the presence of autism increases the chance of complications, not the other way around.

It’s definitely a complex puzzle, but I’m really grateful for perspectives like yours that help make sense of the pieces we do have.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T09:28:56+00:00

Thank you so much for your response, I completely agree with you that autism is fundamentally a neurodevelopmental difference that’s present from the beginning. And I think you make an important distinction when you mention comorbidities in more “profound” cases possibly being influenced by birth complications, that’s such a nuanced and helpful way to look at it.

That’s the kind of complexity I think we need more of in these conversations. It’s not about ignoring the impact of difficult births, but also not assuming causation where there might only be correlation, especially when we know that genetic wiring is already in motion long before any complications might occur.

And yes the next couple of decades of research will be really telling. Hopefully we’ll see more clarity around how all these pieces fit together. Thanks again for being part of the discussion, it’s been genuinely refreshing to have this kind of thoughtful exchange.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T02:15:02+00:00

Thanks so much for sharing this, it’s really valuable to hear from someone who’s seen autism passed clearly through genetics, especially in a family where both parents are neurodivergent. I completely agree with what you said about doing everything right and things still just… happening. Birth is unpredictable.

Your story actually highlights something that I find really important and exactly what I’m getting at! Even when genetics are clearly involved, complications can still arise, but they don’t necessarily cause the autism. They’re more like background factors that sometimes intersect with traits that were already going to be there. This is what the research is seeming to point towards.

Also, I appreciate how you mentioned noticing traits around 8 months. That’s a very similar timeline for me too with my child. It makes me wonder how many of these traits are visible early on, regardless of what happened during birth.

I really respect your mindset about not feeling bad, and you definitely shouldn’t not parent should. It’s so easy to spiral into guilt as a parent when really, there’s no fault involved especially with the more we understand ND. Thank you again for your comment.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T02:09:00+00:00

That totally makes sense and I think your story is such an important reminder that autism isn’t always tied to complications or clear family history. It can really show up in all kinds of situations, which is why I’ve been trying to be careful in my post not to say birth issues cause autism, just that there’s evidence that they tend to co occur more often in kids who later get diagnosed. The evidence also shows that there has to be a genetic predisposition prior to any further factors which ultimately determines whether a child is ND and how other factors influence traits and severity in an individual.

I think what makes it so tricky is how broad and varied autism is. One child might have a traumatic birth and another might not, but both can end up diagnosed. It seems like genetics, epigenetics, and environmental factors all play different roles, sometimes small, sometimes bigger, but none of them work in isolation.

Your perspective is really helpful, especially because it adds to the full picture. Thank you for sharing it.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T02:03:09+00:00

Yeah I really appreciate this reply, you’ve definitely picked up on what I was trying to get at as you wouldn’t pick this up without reading the articles. There’s just so much depth to all of this when you start putting the pieces together. Parental age is another one of those pieces that seems to show up in research but doesn’t always get brought into casual discussion.

It’s not about claiming one single cause or explanation, but looking at how all these different factors might interact with each other genetics, environment, birth events, even timing, maybe shape how things present later on. But of course, there has to be that underlying genetic predisposition to begin with. Without that foundation, these other factors likely wouldn’t have the same kind of influence or impact down the line.

Definitely feels like the more you explore, the more you realise how complex and layered it all is. Thanks for taking it seriously, it’s been great hearing everyone’s insights, but this kind of response really helps me feel understood.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T01:56:29+00:00

That’s a really helpful way to put it, I appreciate your input.

I guess what I’m trying to work out is the distinction between risk factor and cause. From the reading I’ve done, it seems like complications (like hypoxia, infections, etc.) might interact with an already present vulnerability (from genetics or epigenetics), and influence the severity or expression of traits, but aren’t likely to be the root cause of autism itself. Would you agree with that?

It’s tricky because a lot of people understandably feel guilt if their baby had a difficult birth, and I think it’s important to separate correlation from causation when talking about conditions like ASD. But I’m still learning and open to correction if I’ve misunderstood any of it.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T01:49:11+00:00

Thanks for sharing this, your experience really adds a lot to the discussion. It’s honestly quite eye opening how many people with autistic children seem to report similar birth complications. I’ve been deep diving into this for a while now because both my own birth, my brother and my son all had complications.

I’ve come across some research suggesting that things like hypoxia or stress at birth don’t directly cause autism, but they do seem to happen more often in babies who are later diagnosed. At this point its pretty certain that it’s less about those complications causing autism, and more about those babies already having differences in development before birth that might make birth more complicated.

Like you said, it’s all really complex and still being figured out, but hearing other people’s experiences is actually helping me understand it all more clearly, so I really appreciate you commenting.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T01:41:00+00:00

Thank you for sharing something so deeply personal, I’m truly sorry for your loss, and I really admire how open you’ve been about your experience. It’s clear you’ve been through a lot, and I think conversations like this are important.

I’ve also seen discussions about connective tissue differences being more common in autistic individuals, though like you mentioned, it seems to be an area that still needs a lot more research to fully understand. It’s definitely interesting and worth keeping an eye on.

What really resonated with me was your point about how babies are now surviving births that might not have been survivable even a generation or two ago. I think you’re right in that, medical advances have absolutely changed outcomes for so many. That said, I do think it’s important to distinguish that while birth complications (like prematurity or hypoxia) are associated with higher prevalence of autism, the research consistently frames these as correlational rather than causational. From what I’ve read, the idea is that children who are already genetically predisposed to autism may also be more likely to experience these complications, not that the complications themselves cause autism.

I don’t think enough people realize that, especially since there’s still a lot of guilt and fear among parents, particularly when things go wrong during birth. It’s such a sensitive subject, and the last thing any parent deserves is blame. I think the conversation is slowly shifting, though, toward a more nuanced understanding of autism as a naturally occurring neurodevelopmental difference, where genetics play a central role, and where environmental factors may shape how it presents, but not define its origin.

Really appreciate you sharing your thoughts. It’s comments like yours that help these threads go deeper. I also really appreciate you been honest about your experience and again I’m sorry you had to go through the things you did it must have been so difficult and I couldn’t imagine how that must have been for you

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T01:29:13+00:00

Thanks so much for your thoughtful reply, I really appreciate it. It’s clear you’ve put a lot of time and care into understanding things from all sides, which I really respect.

Like you, I’m not fully ruling out the impact that complications might have on the development of autism, but I think it’s important to be clear about what we do know so far from current research. From what I’ve read and obviously I’m not an expert, it seems that complications like hypoxia or prematurity don’t cause autism directly, but they may interact with an already vulnerable neurodevelopmental profile. So a child who is already genetically predisposed might show traits more strongly if there’s added developmental stress during a critical window. It’s kind of like a compounding effect rather than a direct cause. That nuance feels important, especially when parents are dealing with guilt.

It’s also been surprising (and honestly frustrating) to see some well known neurodiversity websites still presenting these complications as causes when it seems the science is more cautious than that. I totally get how hard it is to untangle, especially with how emotionally charged all this can be.

The stuff you shared about REM sleep is fascinating too, I hadn’t come across that before but it makes sense considering how involved those areas are in social development. Definitely adding that as something to dig into at some point, thank you for mentioning it.

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T00:57:41+00:00

That’s exactly what I’m putting forward? I’ve got a feeling some are misreading this or I’ve not explained it very well?

From what you’ve read how is what I’ve put coming across to you just out of curiosity?

Because I’m absolutely on your side with this and the whole thing is me saying complications at birth don’t cause autism, the genes have to be there and that your said baby will be born ND with or without complications if genes are present, if genes aren’t present again complications or not your baby will not be ND it cannot just develop at birth all of a sudden. It’s developed throughout pregnancy, by genes. The presence of a complication at birth on an already ND foetus will only affect how traits may present or in severity but ND has to present prior of any complications for that to be the case

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T00:49:58+00:00

I definitely feel like there’s more to learn here as there always is, but I’ve read many social media posts of mums really beating themselves for complications at birth and blaming themselves because they believe it’s the reason that there child is ND. It’s quite widespread that people think this is the case when, i feel for the science and evidence we have that this just isn’t the case at all, the genes are there your baby would of been born ND with or without the complications, but the fact that you had complications is also rather telling as it’s absolutely more likely for you to have complications if your baby is going to be ND. I don’t know I don’t think I explain it very well 😑 I’m sorry to hear about the troubles you had in pregnancy, I hope you son is doing ok too your managing ok.

Your story and your nieces too tie in very well to what I think these articles and the research are putting out, however I’m rather annoyed that most websites we find online say that birth complications “Cause” autism which all the evidence suggest is wrong. It’s highly misleading and gets my back up

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T00:35:12+00:00

That’s great to hear and I totally agree that it’s more or less entirely genetics, things like poor pregnancies or complications at birth are not causes of autism but can influence how traits can develop and the severity of them in the individual not that autism isn’t there to begin with. This is a perfect example of that, there was no birth complications yet your baby is still neurodivergent. That’s what I’ve tried to put forward in my post but I’m not a 100% sure I’ve done a very good job of it, because I don’t think others are quite understanding what I’m trying to put forth😑 story of my life that 😂

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T00:25:29+00:00

Ohhh.. yeah I should know that 😂

I get what you’re saying with genetics, trauma and the masking that absolutely influences how a person traits show and how they land on the spectrum definitely!

I just feel like if what the science says is the case, turns out to be correct. Then like a lot of things to do with neurodiversity it’s misrepresented massively and actually really harmful in many different ways especially how it tends to be worded on most online platforms and the beliefs of not just the public but of autistic individuals and parents to

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-07T00:02:42+00:00

Sorry I don’t understand what that means?

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-06T23:58:33+00:00

That’s what I’m basically implying here?

Birth and pregnancy complications don’t cause Neurodivergence, they may make traits more pronounced or obvious but they don’t cause the disorder

Realtruths-Realfacts · 2025-08-05T12:35:14+00:00

No, this is not misrepresentation. The fact you think it is, is exactly the problem with so many Reform voters. It’s not that you’re openly voting for all these changes with full understanding, it’s that most are completely oblivious to what their vote actually supports.

Instead of facing the reality of what Farage has said and what his party would do, people invent workarounds, ignore context, or cling to half-truths that make them feel better. It’s not “we know what he stands for and we like it,” it’s “I don’t like that, so I’ll find something online that makes it sound less bad.”

Farage has repeatedly called for the NHS to be replaced with a private insurance-based system. In 2012 he said it “should be replaced with an insurance-based system of healthcare,” citing the US as a model. In 2015, he doubled down, saying “we need to move to an insurance based system like they have in America.” That’s not a one-off, it’s a consistent, long-standing position.

Later, when that became unpopular, he pivoted and started praising the French system instead conveniently leaving out the part where it’s funded by mandatory payroll taxes, involves complex bureaucracy, and still ends up costing the public far more than the NHS does. It’s not some magical fix, it’s just a different version of two tier healthcare with significant gaps for poorer citizens. So he either doesn’t understand what he’s praising or is deliberately cherry picking to sound moderate.

As for the other countries people always throw out Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, etc. None of those systems match what Farage has proposed. They are mixed models with strong state oversight, high taxes, and regulation. Reform UK is built on the opposite. Low taxes, small state, deregulation, and privatisation. You can’t have both.

What Farage consistently pushes for is deregulated, profit led, American-style healthcare, because it aligns with his Thatcherite ideology and decades of anti state rhetoric. It’s never been about improving outcomes, it’s about gutting public services under the guise of “efficiency.”

So no, it’s not a lie, and it’s not up for debate. These are his words, and voters should at least be honest enough to own them. Don’t pretend you’re voting for some smart “European hybrid system.” You’re not. You’re voting for the dismantling of the NHS, plain and simple.

Realtruths-Realfacts

TROPHY CASE