Home Forums Non Football Seriously WTF?

  • #176058

    THE-99%
    Moderator
    Offline
    Topics: 890
    Replies: 4234
    Been thanked: 847 times

    The UK demands non-EU nurses and doctors from abroad pay a surcharge (yep, those same ones who are risking their own lives to save British ones)

    #176060

    BloodyRubbishIron
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 34
    Replies: 1829
    Been thanked: 1035 times

    But we’re doing them the highest honour by clapping them every Thursday. Why are they not grateful for our efforts in making their lives better? All this whining about having to have satisfactory working conditions risks alienating the brave clappers, with their Blitz spirits, whose actions should make it worthwhile! Who needs better equipment, pay or reasonable demands when you can have a feel good clap every week, which has the added bonus of making the clapper feel like they’re better than others and can shame those who don’t as hating the NHS?

    This post may or may not be entirely serious.

    #176066

    BloodyRubbishIron
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 34
    Replies: 1829
    Been thanked: 1035 times

    In all seriousness, this isn’t a dig at clapping as such, I join in it myself as I have realised it is good for boosting morale. However, it cannot be the only means of looking after vital workers. They need to have fair working conditions and the best possible access to the resources required. I realise that there are many ‘clappers’ who do care about this, this is not directed at them or anyone specifically, but I feel that there has been a lack of care about issues affecting the NHS, and excuses for the lack of provisions, for years, and many of those will be now clapping away and some may be frowning on those who don’t, as if that is a big issue.

    I will say that the government are thankfully reviewing this now, but like everything at the moment, it all seems to be very reactive rather than proactive.

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #176071

    alcazar
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 171
    Replies: 4094
    Been thanked: 1203 times

    More evidence that it’s not always what we think of as government saying/doing things, but often faceless well paid civil servants?

    #176073

    Northumbiron
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 249
    Replies: 10997
    Been thanked: 5213 times

    BRI, isn’t this a British trait?

    We continue to send our forces to fight and die on foreign soil, but it’s okay because we wear a poppy and stand in silence for two minutes every November.

    And the government don’t need to support them financially because we have Help for Heroes to pass the buck to.

    We seem to be treating our new front line troops in a similar way.

    #176092

    BloodyRubbishIron
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 34
    Replies: 1829
    Been thanked: 1035 times

    Yes, I don’t think it’s come out of nowhere. This has been evident for some time in how perfomative supports of gratitude are framed and how those not partaking in it are demonised. I think there are unhealthy elements within it, which need challenging, including the ignorance of efforts which may help others.

    However, I don’t think your military analogy is the best, in that sometimes our troops do need to go abroad. It’s often forgotten, but Iraq was in part a response to a growing outrage at past atrocities being ignored. Rwandan and Bosnian genocides and crimes against humanity were ignored by the powers leading to misery and death. The shock of this prompted a more interventionalist approach, which brought justified interventions in Kosovo, East Timor and Sierre Leone. I certainly wouldn’t want to stand against stopping the ending of human rights abuses, so that we can feel good about not having troops abroad.

    However, I do agree with the sentiment that a lot of the posturing over Remembrance distracts from real issues in homelessness and mental health amongst veterans. None of this is to say we shouldn’t remember, however, for anyone reading, but there seems to be an image put forward of respect for troops through perfomative action, and demonising of those who don’t, instead of actual efforts to help them.

    #176112

    Northumbiron
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 249
    Replies: 10997
    Been thanked: 5213 times

    Won’t get into an argument over intervention policy vs defence policy but will agree that lack of government funding has put immense pressure on charities to cover the shortfall.

    Pressure that inevitably finds itself on your doorstep or on your tv screen. I have standing orders for donations to several charities, but I’d rather that money came out of my bank account in the form of taxation so that the NHS, Education, Housing etc could be properly funded.

    #176116

    BloodyRubbishIron
    Participant
    Offline
    Topics: 34
    Replies: 1829
    Been thanked: 1035 times

    Fair. I’ll just state that it is more complicated than intervention being good or bad. It’s more complex than that. I think that intervening to stop war crimes and ethnic cleansing, when possible, is a good thing, and something to be proud of. I think it is an issue which is often greyer than portrayed. Those on the anti-war side often make it seem that theirs is the only moral side, that to object to intervention means no war and misery, when Rwanda, Bosnia and Syria (against Assad) show that a lack of intervention doesn’t necessarily mean there’s no misery. Kosovo, Sierre Leone and East Timor show that sometimes interventions can cause an end to misery. Iraq shows that interventions can go badly wrong, however. These matters are often challenging, and we should remember not to be so damning of either side, provided their arguments are founded in respect for human rights, by which I mean rejection of those who apologise for human rights abusing tyrants when arguing against intervention and jingoistic claptrap from some when arguing in favour of conflict.

    However, I do think it has some relevance here. I think some people, but again by no means all, use what are false concerns for human life when arguing against conflict, to make it seem like they’re being honourable and caring, which distracts from what could be beneficial solutions to international problems. Those who wail about the dead from western interventions, but make it clear they don’t give a damn or support the likes of Assad (the likes of Giles Fraser, Tulsi Gabbard, George Galloway and Seamus Milne spring to mind) don’t really have concern for human life at the forefront to their opposition, but a tribal opposition to western nations. I certainly see their opposition to conflict for human rights reasons to be a performative sham.

    There are many principled men, in the manner of Robin Cook, who do not deserve to be associated with such, and must stress that I am not referring to them here.

    There is a position for charity, state resources cannot cover everything. However, the impact of these gestures (clapping, Tom Moore’s actions) bears less for improved conditions than policy. While, efforts are to be commended, and I have nothing against Tom Moore or thanks given to him, I worry that we too easily move to feel good stories in these times of trouble, when there is a lot to improve. Clapping is good for morale, but the impacts are comparatively minor.

    #176117

    THE-99%
    Moderator
    Offline
    Topics: 890
    Replies: 4234
    Been thanked: 847 times

    ah Yes Tom Moore ,well meaning bloke used as a smokescreen by the British paravda, clap and praise Tom Moore, but don’t question the Tories as the man said ” “not the time to ask”

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.