BBC: Coronavirus: UK lockdown solidarity 'starting to fray'

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
11,175
Location
Isle of Man
He's clearly hacked off the North's Muslim community more than a little...
He wheeled out a backbencher to blame them, too. Plausible deniability, of course, but make no mistake: that is the message direct from Tory Central Office.

I never knew Dominic Cummings was Bangladeshi and living in a terraced house in Halifax though :lol:
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
54,468
Location
Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
He wheeled out a backbencher to blame them, too. Plausible deniability, of course, but make no mistake: that is the message direct from Tory Central Office.

I never knew Dominic Cummings was Bangladeshi and living in a terraced house in Halifax though :lol:
:)

Well, there is an upside that if they alienate all the voters then they'll lose the next election. The downside is we have to wait 4 years.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
11,175
Location
Isle of Man
:)

Well, there is an upside that if they alienate all the voters then they'll lose the next election. The downside is we have to wait 4 years.
They're appealing to their new core base of racist Brexitists. If it doubt, blame the brown people.

Sad thing is, it works.

The old red wall has gone because the voters there might have been trade unionists, but they were the trade unionists who supported whites-only closed shops well into the 70s.
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
11,690
Location
Caerphilly
They're appealing to their new core base of racist Brexitists. If it doubt, blame the brown people.

Sad thing is, it works.

The old red wall has gone because the voters there might have been trade unionists, but they were the trade unionists who supported whites-only closed shops well into the 70s.
What has Brexit got to do with it. Remainers like tossing it in.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
11,175
Location
Isle of Man
What has Brexit got to do with it. Remainers like tossing it in.
The Tories' new core voter base is racist Brexitists. They won the election purely based on "getting Brexit done". Do you deny any of that?

This is why they continue to blame brown people for everything, regardless of the truth.
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
11,690
Location
Caerphilly
The Tories' new core voter base is racist Brexitists. They won the election purely based on "getting Brexit done". Do you deny any of that?

This is why they continue to blame brown people for everything, regardless of the truth.
Why racist ? Boris said "Get Brexit Done" because there had been too many Remainers who couldn't respect the democratic vote and had been doing anything to try and delay and frustrate it.
 

farleigh

Member
Joined
1 Nov 2016
Messages
713
The Tories' new core voter base is racist Brexitists. They won the election purely based on "getting Brexit done". Do you deny any of that?

This is why they continue to blame brown people for everything, regardless of the truth.
As always - willing to learn. Can you convince me that the majority of Tory supporters are racist? Can you give an example of where they have explicitly 'blamed brown people'?
 

brad465

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
818
Location
Maidstone
The Tories' new core voter base is racist Brexitists. They won the election purely based on "getting Brexit done". Do you deny any of that?

This is why they continue to blame brown people for everything, regardless of the truth.
Why racist ? Boris said "Get Brexit Done" because there had been too many Remainers who couldn't respect the democratic vote and had been doing anything to try and delay and frustrate it.
As always - willing to learn. Can you convince me that the majority of Tory supporters are racist? Can you give an example of where they have explicitly 'blamed brown people'?
The biggest issue I think is First-past-the-post: the Tories have that 80 seat (now 78) majority from only 44% of overall votes, which demonstrates no single party needs to appeal to a wide share of the electorate, so they resort to extreme tactics (including blaming others and coercing the Brexit Party out of standing everywhere) to strengthen a minority base that is enough for 100% of the power, but divides society in the process, hence why any increase in unity brought about by lockdown will be short lived, especially with the way the whole crisis has been handled.
 

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
1,238
Location
London
The Tories' new core voter base is racist Brexitists. They won the election purely based on "getting Brexit done". Do you deny any of that?

This is why they continue to blame brown people for everything, regardless of the truth.
For once you don’t need to blame Brexit, or cast around for a conspiracy theory, to attack this government.

You hate the Tories, we get it. You’ve probably never voted for them, and probably never will. They should be a *lot* more concerned by the fact that many of those of us who did vote for them are equally furious with the way they’re (not) handling Covid.

EDIT: and please stop beating the Brexit drum (it was never about “brown people”). In any case, it’s irrelevant now that we have left the EU. Time to make your peace with it, and move on, don’t you think?
 
Last edited:

Cowley

Established Member
Associate Staff
General Discussion
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
8,307
Location
Devon
The Brexit discussion needs to be left there I think...
Thanks.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
11,175
Location
Isle of Man
Can you give an example of where they have explicitly 'blamed brown people'?
The comments I was referring to, from the Conservative MP for the Calder Valley, are a great start.

For once you don’t need to blame Brexit, or cast around for a conspiracy theory, to attack this government.
I said the Tories- by explicitly blaming BAME people for the local lockdowns- are appealing to their core voter base. I disparaged them as racist Brexitists but I didn't blame Brexit, or even really mention Brexit. Read what I actually said, not what you think I said.

It was a side comment to my actual point, which is they're wheeling out the dog whistle to appeal to their core voters who are receptive to such things, and to stop their core voters blaming them for their staggering ineptitude.

They should be a *lot* more concerned by the fact that many of those of us who did vote for them are equally furious with the way they’re (not) handling Covid
And that, of course, is why they're wheeling out the dog whistle. "Don't blame us for the lockdown, it's those brown people not doing what they're told". That is literally what their backbench MP said, and which Boris Johnson doubled down on.

They use backbenchers so there is plausible deniability whilst getting the message out to those who are receptive to it.
 
Last edited:

43066

Established Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
1,238
Location
London
It was a side comment to my actual point, which is they're wheeling out the dog whistle to appeal to their core voters who are receptive to such things, and to stop their core voters blaming them for their staggering ineptitude.
You love to put people into boxes. BAME people aren’t one homogenous mass, you know.

The BAME Tory voters I know (I’m off for dinner with one shortly) acknowledge that there are cultural differences, and that certain cultures have a greater propensity towards living in multigenerational households. Hence Eid - with large family gatherings - is a flash point.

I don’t agree with the lockdown strategy generally, but given that’s what is being followed, Eid is a legitimate concern. it’s no different to Christmas being cancelled by this incompetent government, as it no doubt will be.

Another news flash for you: Islam is a religion, not a race. Not everyone who observes Eid is BAME, not everyone who observes Christmas is white. I know a fair few Asian people who spend Christmas with their families.

Not everything has to be put down to racism, identity politics etc.
 
Last edited:

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
3,682
Location
Nottingham
I sorta agree - I had an annual repeat prescription review last month, and it was definitely *easier* not having to go to the surgery to see the doctor for two minutes just so they could tick some boxes on the computer.

But on the other hand shouldn't the doctor have been looking at me and deciding if I actually still need the eczema medications I take, or whether things should be changed up?

Routine things are fine if they really are routine, but a good doctor should have the skills to spot something going wrong, possibly even before the patient notices. They're far less likely to be able do that over the phone when they can't see the patients demeanour, attitude, etc.
Indeed, it's certainly an interesting discussion, perhaps if there's more interest, we should start a thread?
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
3,682
Location
Nottingham
Now maybe of course my assumption that this will happen is wrong. We could be building up immunity fast. But if so, why aren't infection levels dropping?
We don't have a control for this level of restriction with zero immunity, and given the current infection rates, it's probably too small to make realistic measurements, as even a thousand infections is a small percentage of the 65 million of us.

Couple that with the easing of restrictions, and changes in behaviour and viral prevelence, and it'd be an incredibly difficult thing to measure.
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
760
We don't have a control for this level of restriction with zero immunity, and given the current infection rates, it's probably too small to make realistic measurements, as even a thousand infections is a small percentage of the 65 million of us.

Couple that with the easing of restrictions, and changes in behaviour and viral prevelence, and it'd be an incredibly difficult thing to measure.
Perhaps so - it's very hard to decouple building up immunity from all the other changes.

But the fact that infections are level (or rising?) at the moment suggests that we don't have sufficient immunity to be able to relax further without seeing infections go up.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
3,682
Location
Nottingham
Perhaps so - it's very hard to decouple building up immunity from all the other changes.

But the fact that infections are level (or rising?) at the moment suggests that we don't have sufficient immunity to be able to relax further without seeing infections go up.
Indeed, but thats a slightly seperate question from "we don't have sufficient immunity to be able to relax further without seeing infections go up and overwhelming the NHS"
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
6,204
Indeed, but thats a slightly seperate question from "we don't have sufficient immunity to be able to relax further without seeing infections go up and overwhelming the NHS"
There are also big question marks on how long any immunity lasts.
 

Skimpot flyer

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2012
Messages
671
The problem is those people in their 20s and 30s could catch the virus and then pass it on to their parents or grandparents. They may not be as lucky as their children / grandchildren in terms of their recovery from the virus.
Good grief <sigh>

I know I’ve made this point several times before on other threads, but I’ve yet to see anyone come back with an answer to this question:
Why have the mass gatherings of 8-9 weeks ago (crowded beaches, BLM demonstrations etc) not resulted in a spike in deaths by now? It’s more than enough time for the people attending such events to have mixed with relatives, other adults in shops and pubs, to have - even asymptomatically - infected vulnerable adults and those people to be in ICU or worse, to have died ? The WHO was making dark pronouncements that even being outdoors won’t save you from this deadly virus, as there is evidence of airborne transmission.

It seems that now daily deaths are ‘flattened’ the government is now using the number of infections as the weapon of fear.
I predict that when public pressure begins to mount for the rules on face-coverngs to be jettisoned, the argument will then be twisted that ‘although infection rates are now below 1 in 100,000, we have to guard against a more deadly, mutated form of this virus‘

I too am past the view that the handling of this crisis is beyond ineptitude. It smacks now of something more sinister
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
23,863
Location
Yorks
Good grief <sigh>

I know I’ve made this point several times before on other threads, but I’ve yet to see anyone come back with an answer to this question:
Why have the mass gatherings of 8-9 weeks ago (crowded beaches, BLM demonstrations etc) not resulted in a spike in deaths by now? It’s more than enough time for the people attending such events to have mixed with relatives, other adults in shops and pubs, to have - even asymptomatically - infected vulnerable adults and those people to be in ICU or worse, to have died ? The WHO was making dark pronouncements that even being outdoors won’t save you from this deadly virus, as there is evidence of airborne transmission.

It seems that now daily deaths are ‘flattened’ the government is now using the number of infections as the weapon of fear.
I predict that when public pressure begins to mount for the rules on face-coverngs to be jettisoned, the argument will then be twisted that ‘although infection rates are now below 1 in 100,000, we have to guard against a more deadly, mutated form of this virus‘

I too am past the view that the handling of this crisis is beyond ineptitude. It smacks now of something more sinister
They were outdoors - which rules out outdoors transmission as a likely risk to my mind.
 

MontyMinerWA

Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
61
Good grief <sigh>

I know I’ve made this point several times before on other threads, but I’ve yet to see anyone come back with an answer to this question:
Why have the mass gatherings of 8-9 weeks ago (crowded beaches, BLM demonstrations etc) not resulted in a spike in deaths by now? It’s more than enough time for the people attending such events to have mixed with relatives, other adults in shops and pubs, to have - even asymptomatically - infected vulnerable adults and those people to be in ICU or worse, to have died ? The WHO was making dark pronouncements that even being outdoors won’t save you from this deadly virus, as there is evidence of airborne transmission.

It seems that now daily deaths are ‘flattened’ the government is now using the number of infections as the weapon of fear.
I predict that when public pressure begins to mount for the rules on face-coverngs to be jettisoned, the argument will then be twisted that ‘although infection rates are now below 1 in 100,000, we have to guard against a more deadly, mutated form of this virus‘

I too am past the view that the handling of this crisis is beyond ineptitude. It smacks now of something more sinister
I was referring to indoor events. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear.
 

AdamWW

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
760
Good grief <sigh>

I know I’ve made this point several times before on other threads, but I’ve yet to see anyone come back with an answer to this question:
Why have the mass gatherings of 8-9 weeks ago (crowded beaches, BLM demonstrations etc) not resulted in a spike in deaths by now? It’s more than enough time for the people attending such events to have mixed with relatives, other adults in shops and pubs, to have - even asymptomatically - infected vulnerable adults and those people to be in ICU or worse, to have died ? The WHO was making dark pronouncements that even being outdoors won’t save you from this deadly virus, as there is evidence of airborne transmission.

It seems that now daily deaths are ‘flattened’ the government is now using the number of infections as the weapon of fear.
I predict that when public pressure begins to mount for the rules on face-coverngs to be jettisoned, the argument will then be twisted that ‘although infection rates are now below 1 in 100,000, we have to guard against a more deadly, mutated form of this virus‘

I too am past the view that the handling of this crisis is beyond ineptitude. It smacks now of something more sinister
Well that's a different point to saying 20-30 year olds should be allowed to congregate because they aren't likely to die of Covid-19.

I think it's very hard to know what is driving infection numbers - and to what extent (if any) crowding on beaches/demonstrations has had an effect. There are so many other things going on.

I think the government is using infection levels not as a weapon of fear, but (correctly in my view) as the best indicator of how much we can afford to relax restrictions.

If we see infection rates plummeting but the government won't relax restrictions, then would be the time to worry. But I think that is rather unlikely.
 

Skimpot flyer

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2012
Messages
671
I was referring to indoor events. I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear.
People gathered in close proximity during those protests, and were standing or sitting together for much more than 15 minutes at a time, to listen to speeches. Many people were not wearing masks at all; many wearing them as chin warmers. If this virus is so easily transmissible, I don’t understand how - given the proximity and extended time - it somehow fails to infect people in that situation, outdoors. Yet government says that passing someone in a supermarket aisle indoors, for 5-20 seconds, is so incredibly dangerous that we all need to wear face-coverings!
 

talldave

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2013
Messages
1,666
People gathered in close proximity during those protests, and were standing or sitting together for much more than 15 minutes at a time, to listen to speeches. Many people were not wearing masks at all; many wearing them as chin warmers. If this virus is so easily transmissible, I don’t understand how - given the proximity and extended time - it somehow fails to infect people in that situation, outdoors. Yet government says that passing someone in a supermarket aisle indoors, for 5-20 seconds, is so incredibly dangerous that we all need to wear face-coverings!
And despite infections dropping whilst we did that for several months. This is why I ignore government muppets. Present some facts and gain some credibility.
 

Scrotnig

Member
Joined
5 Sep 2017
Messages
379
It seems that now daily deaths are ‘flattened’ the government is now using the number of infections as the weapon of fear.
I predict that when public pressure begins to mount for the rules on face-coverngs to be jettisoned, the argument will then be twisted that ‘although infection rates are now below 1 in 100,000, we have to guard against a more deadly, mutated form of this virus‘
I think with masks we will also get "they will help prevent deaths from common flu so we are keeping them long term".

There seems to be some kind of mask fetish going on with some people at the moment. It's bizarre.
 

Skimpot flyer

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2012
Messages
671
More likely is that the previous 'stigma' around masks is much reduced so people wear them as a matter of choice anyway.
God, I hope not. Interaction via facial expression is fundamental to what makes us human.
The government had better be prepared if there is civil unrest in the future, because people looting and committing arson will be much harder to identify when wearing ‘everyday’ masks.
Oh, and if as rumoured, they mandate the wearing of gloves, culprits won’t be leaving too many fingerprints either...
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
7,737
God, I hope not. Interaction via facial expression is fundamental to what makes us human.
The government had better be prepared if there is civil unrest in the future, because people looting and committing arson will be much harder to identify when wearing ‘everyday’ masks.
Oh, and if as rumoured, they mandate the wearing of gloves, culprits won’t be leaving too many fingerprints either...
Not routinely.

But in future more general wearing of a mask when you're out and about whilst feeling under the weather wouldn't be a bad outcome of all of this rather than the "traditional" approach of sneezing and snorting all over the fresh veg in the supermarket.
 

Top