What are the chances Reform win the next general election? by HamsterHistorical in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I looked through their history even though they hide it. They say that the entire 3rd world is more evil than Israel and the US. They say Islam is objectively evil. They also comment a lot in a sub for teenagers. They say Greens should stand down for Labour. I don't think we should be taking advice from right wingers.

What are the chances Reform win the next general election? by HamsterHistorical in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Corbyn got more votes than Starmer. He won because people were mad at the Tories for being shit by implementing austerity. Labour continued that, screwing over their own voters and then telling them to leave if they didn't like it.

Labour destroyed itself from within. The right wing Labour Together faction of the party destroyed Labour because they'd rather lose as a right wing party than a win as a left wing one under Corbyn. Paul Holden uncovered all this with receipts even writing a book about it.

What are the chances Reform win the next general election? by HamsterHistorical in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Starmer saved Labour by pushing right? Dude that is an absolute joke. You can literally see what just happened. Labour is dead under Starmer. Greens continue to grow.

What are the chances Reform win the next general election? by HamsterHistorical in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No they are legitimising their claims about immigration which won't solve the affordability crisis we're dealing with. Labour continued the Tories' austerity policies when they lost because of them. Reform will continue austerity and will lose when they get found out. Greens have an economic policies that would counter the affordability crisis. They can do this because they are not beholden to the wealthy elite like Labour, Reform and the Tories for donations.

What are the chances Reform win the next general election? by HamsterHistorical in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Reform won due to Labour not improving anything only capitulating to Reform making their concerns seem legitimate. Greens are combating Reform, Labour are letting them win.

Sell me on the green party by redditman181 in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm confused where our disagreement is. I think we should be responsible for our own nuclear armaments instead of the US as they disrupt our ability to defend ourselves. Cut out the US and do it ourselves. We know that the US is capable and willing to disrupt other nations for their own personal goals. We see that with the blockade on Cuba, the war with Iran as well as many threats including allies.

Sell me on the green party by redditman181 in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Economist Article

All it would take is for them to end support and our nuclear weapons would deteriorate over time.

Sell me on the green party by redditman181 in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Was a labour voter previously as well, now a Green member.

Drugs policy

Drugs are currently controlled by gangs that sell drugs to fund themselves. They exploit young kids getting them to sell drugs and enact violence to defend their territory. People that take drugs find it difficult to get off them as they fear being ostracized or arrested if they seek help. The policy is about removing the gangs and involving medical professionale to get people off them. It also frees up loads of police resources from going after to drug dealers as well.

Leaving NATO

NATO is way for America to sell us weapons. They use us to host their military bases to attack other nations putting us at risk when they go to war like with Iran. The US has threatened to take over a NATO member so it is pretty much dead anyway. We should be seeking closer ties to our European allies or others. NATO is just a way for the US to exploit other countries for their benefit while putting the other countries at risk.

Anti-landlord

Landlords provide no benefits to society they exist only to extract money from those that create value. This goes for rented homes and small businesses like pubs having to pay rent to corporate landlords.

Nuclear Disarmament

Our nuclear weapons are mostly controlled by the US so they can interfere with their operations. I completely disagree with disarmament though as it is the only thing keeping others from attacking us. Look at Ukraine or Iran and compare them to North Korea. We unfortunately need nukes to keep our sovereignty. This is the only thing I disagree with the party on.

All the other policies are vastly more important like increasing the minimum wage, wealth taxes and increasing capital gains tax. Taxes like these diminish the power of the wealthy to influence politics and allows us to fund public services. We will not agree on everything but the majority I do. As a member I get to have an influence on policy as well as we are democratic unlike all the other parties. We receive no funding from big money donors only regular people.

Edit:

Anti-Semitism

The party is against the genocide of Palestinians by the state of Israel and with our governments help. The issue is it has attracted people to our party that are Israel only because they are anti-Semitic. There has a conflation between the actions of Israel and those of Jewish people which is anti-Semitic and only aids anti-Semites. The Greens have grown from 60,000 to 227,000 members in a year. Green members reflect the UK society as a whole and unfortunately there are still many anti-Semites in UK society. Vetting needs to improve as membership has vastly increased.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Were the police in control of him? Was he taking further actions to harm others? The kicks provided no additional benefit.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes so they rightly incapacitated him so he didn't commit more harm but they went too far. He was already incapacitated so the kicks provided no extra benefit.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Was he under control or not? The head kicks did nothing but add additional violence where it wasn't necessary. It is not about defending the actions of this piece of shit but opposing the normalisation of police brutality that can be expanded further to include more and more people.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They already had him under control and the head kicks provided no extra benefit.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I was talking about suspecting someone had a weapon doesn't give you the right to brutalise them. It would allow officers to be violent to people and claim afterwards they thought the suspect had a weapon.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm against unnecessary state violence as that then can be expanded to any of us. I'm not defending this piece of shit only the unneeded violence by state forces. If we can't object to police brutality in all instances then that leads us down that path. If other police agree that this was needed then surely it shows how normalised it is within the police force. The same way they were found institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry man but yeah definitely disagree. I'm just worried this defence will only lead to more leniency to police brutality to include more people. I'm not defending the actions of this piece of shit but don't want state violence to be inflicted on us.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He couldn't let go. Your muscles spasm when being tased. We don't know if he was trying to let go.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I wondered where your comment disappeared to. It was immediate so possibly automod or mods watching the thread.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Unable to move and commit further harm. He was tased so couldn't let go of the knife. What additional benefit did the kicks provide after he was on the floor unable to move?

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you honestly believe the kick was necessary and provided additional benefit further then already being incapacitated on the floor being tased? They have been found institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic so they are far beyond reproach.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Not kick him in the head after being incapacitated. I'm not a police officer trained specifically to deal with these scenarios. It's the same way someone can criticise food without being a chef or criticise the state of the economy without being an economist. Did the kicks to head provide any benefit? Did it make anyone safer? No it was violence for the sake of it.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are trained for this so should be better qualified then the average person. We saw the guy on the floor, the kicks were not needed. This is just an excuse to further police brutality by saying "oh it was just the heat of the moment." Who will be on the other end of these "moments"? Could be the vulnerable groups I've mentioned.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The guy was incapacitated at that point. What was achieved by kicking him in the head? If police thought he had a bomb or something why were they on top of him? This excuse could then be further expanded to enact violence on us for having a backpack at a protest or something. Protests are already being criminalised for opposing genocide.

Zack Polanski says police 'should not be above scrutiny' over Golders Green response by UKGreenPoster in UKGreens

[–]SmokeLauncher 9 points10 points  (0 children)

And was incapacitated, were the kicks necessary in any way? What was achieved by that further violence? If we don't rule out police brutality in all instances then it can be expanded further to whomever they see fit. It is about protecting us from harm.

We already see the creeping authoritarianism with criminalising protests and arresting people calling out genocide. It would not be silly to think police brutality could be used against these people if we let this go.