Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Politics

Wings Over Scotland | Protest But Don’t Survive

Published

on

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

If events in Edinburgh today are anything to go by – when a march and rally announced with great fanfare seven months ago, backed by both the “independence” parties in the Scottish Parliament and featuring the First Minister as main speaker, attracted perhaps 1,500 people at the most to Calton Hill on a bright and sunny day – the independence movement faces an imminent final apocalypse.

So here’s how to prepare yourself for when the SNP win a landslide with 35%, Keir Starmer says “So what?” and then a deathly silence descends for another five years.

?

Even Kelly Given and Iona Fyfe didn’t show up for this one. That’s how bad it is.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Tom Skinner says he got paid 2k, BBC says no we didn’t

Published

on

Tom Skinner says he got paid 2k, BBC says no we didn't

Tom Skinner is famous for three things:

  1. Not being political.
  2. Being a member of Reform UK (a political party).
  3. “Bosh”.

In his efforts to explain how un-political he is, Skinner appeared on the politics show Question Time on 26 March. When asked why he did it, Skinner told everyone he was paid £2,000. Now, the BBC has thrown this claim into question:

Bosh!

As Mukhtar highlighted, this is what Skinner brought to the table on Question Time:

In the above clip, Skinner says:

what I don’t like about social media is it’s always about dividing people. It’s always about people screaming and shouting – ‘if you don’t agree with me, if you don’t agree with what I stand for, or if you don’t agree with my politics, I hate you, this, that, the other. You’re a gammon or you’re a snowflake’.

Why are we not… I try and spread a bit of positivity and a bit of love, do you know what I mean?

Advertisement

People should be nicer to each other‘ – wow – with pearls of wisdom like this, you can see why they’d pay him thirteen times the going rate.

Because Skinner is linked to Reform UK (and also to US vice president JD Vance), people have argued the BBC should have made his political affiliations known:

Skinner claimed he wasn’t there to represent a political party; he was simply there to make a tidy £2k:

Tom Skinner — Grand

At this point, it’s clear that someone is lying, and we’re inclined to believe it could be either party.

For some in depth analysis of Question Time, be sure to follow us on social media (links at the top of the page):

Featured image via BBC

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Green Party conference showed democracy, but also its fragility

Published

on

Green Party conference showed democracy, but also its fragility

The Green Party is having its first conference since the major uptick in membership numbers in recent months. But the first day didn’t go smoothly. Because while it showed the party’s internal democracy in full swing, it also showed how easily cynical efforts can undermine it.

Green Party — The workings of a democratic process

First of all, there were reports of an attack on the party’s online voting system. This led to a suggestion of carrying out a ‘hands up’ voting strategy instead. But members quickly raised concerns about this because it could seriously affect the integrity of the voting. So the focus returned to resolving the online voting issues.

The amount of items on the agenda for the day already seemed very ambitious. But with the setbacks, the time available to get through all the agenda items shrank very quickly.

When the tech team had fixed the online voting system, members could promptly progress with votes. And one in particular sought to ensure there was sufficient democratic accountability for the Standing Orders Committee. While this caused another big delay, it seemed to be in the interest of fostering greater democracy.

Advertisement

Through all of this, meanwhile, equal numbers of members could speak for or against all decisions. This allowed people to justify themselves before members voted. That was the same in the case of several no-confidence votes in the chair (which also caused delays to the conference agenda).

In the end, members had a chance to raise and explain concerns, vote, and then keep moving forwards.

It would, however, have been good to see more of the massive membership present (only around 700-900 members attended). And it would also have been good if delays and time limits hadn’t prevented members from getting to vote on all motions in front of them.

The hindering of progress and the blocking of a key vote

It’s very clear that Green members present cared deeply about issues and wanted a fair hearing. And legitimate challenges always arise when interacting with other people, especially online. But it’s fair to think that some interventions were not in good faith.

Advertisement

The Zionism is Racism motion lingered over the day. And efforts inside and outside the party absolutely tried to delay or prevent a vote on it. The excessive use of no-confidence votes in particular seemed intent on pushing the motion back.

Whether or not the delays of the day sought to prevent the Zionism is Racism vote or not, they did. And while the conference followed democratic procedures, these also worked to prevent Green Party members from voting on the important motion.

Featured image via the GreenParty

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Green Party conference votes AGAINST energy nationalisation

Published

on

Green Party conference votes AGAINST energy nationalisation

The Green Party conference has voted in favour of a motion opposing nationalisation of “the five largest energy supply companies”.

Despite the party currently having over 215,000 members, the motion passed with just 478 members voting in favour of it. 192 opposed it, and 15 didn’t vote.

Polls have consistently shown that the vast majority of the UK agrees with public ownership of energy companies, and that this opinion has increased in recent years. This is in no small part because of the devastation of the cost of living crisis.

No nationalisation of ‘electricity retail’ or ‘electricity generation and storage’

The motion called for the deletion of a previous commitment that:

Advertisement

The five largest energy supply companies will be nationalised.

Instead, it called for the insertion of:

As natural monopolies with, at present, high profit margins, electricity national transmission and regional distribution will be brought into public ownership.

And it wanted to insert a position that “electricity generation and storage” are not natural monopolies and should therefore:

have diversity of ownership including private, public, municipal and community schemes

Likewise, it argued that “electricity retail” has “low profit margins” and is not a natural monopoly. Therefore, it sought to add a statement that:

electricity retail will not be nationalised and consumers will have a choice between diverse retailers operating with fair competition.

In reality, as one speaker at the conference insisted, people in vulnerable positions often find it very difficult to find the best deal when choosing between “diverse retailers”.

Advertisement

An amendment that didn’t pass sought to add “as a first priority”, so the new motion would read:

electricity retail will not be nationalised as a first priority

And accompanying this was a note that:

Electricity retail will be more effectively regulated, ensuring fair treatment of vulnerable customers.

What do Green Party members think?

Nuance and policy decisions relating to careful investigation of evidence absolutely matter.

But would the 215,000+ Green members really agree that removing a pledge to nationalise energy giants is the right way to go?

Advertisement

If they disagree, involvement in conference procedures will need to increase in the future.

Featured image via BestforBritain

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Houthis have joined Israel’s war on the side of Iran

Published

on

Houthis have joined Israel's war on the side of Iran

In a new moment of escalation, the Houthis of Yemen have joined Israel’s war on the side of Iran:

Houthis escalation

The Houthis entered the war by launching a military attack on Israel (who themselves began the conflict by attacking Iran):

Advertisement

al Jazeera reported:

Yemen’s Houthi rebels have attacked Israel with a barrage of ballistic missiles – their first such strikes since the United States-Israeli war on Iran began.

Brigadier-General Yahya Saree, a military spokesperson for the Houthis, announced the attack on Saturday on the rebels’ Al Masirah satellite television.

Strikes “will continue until the declared objectives are achieved, as stated in the previous statement by the armed forces, and until the aggression against all fronts of the resistance ceases”, Saree said.

Advertisement

The Israeli military said it intercepted one missile.

As of right now, the Houthis have only declared hostilities against Israel — not the US:

A new opponent entering the war could prove to be a real problem for Israel. As we reported on 27 March, Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid:

shared a post—viewed by 1 million users— warning that Israel is facing a security disaster and that the military is “on the verge of collapse.”

He cited Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, who sounded the same alarm to political-security cabinet. In a veiled message to Netanyahu, he Lapid said:

“Anyone who heard him yesterday will not be able to say, “I didn’t know.””

The war on Iran has led to the partial closure of the Strait of Hormuz. As we’ve all learned, this has proven disastrous, because vast percentages of the world’s fuel, fertiliser, gas, and other resources pass through this narrow passage. What people may learn next is that the Houthis are positioned to close an entirely different strait.

The Bab-al Mandab Strait leads to Egypt’s Suez Canal. This passage allows ships to travel through the Mediterranean, facilitating shipping between Europe and Asia without a need to travel around Africa.

Capital markets commenters the Kobeissi Letter noted the following:

Advertisement

In a major escalation, Yemen’s Houthi Group has officially joined the war with a ballistic missle launch at Israel, just as the war hit its one-month mark.

All eyes are now on the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

If closed, the world loses another ~6 million barrels of daily oil supply

War

The Houthis entering the conflict is another sign that things could continue to escalate. It’s also another moment of grim vindication for those who warned that launching a war in the Middle East would be chaotic, costly, and futile.

Featured image via Al Jazeera

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Labour minister caught in a lie over leasehold betrayal

Published

on

Labour minister caught in a lie over leasehold betrayal

Leasehold properties are a national scandal, and these properties are causing misery for millions of people. Labour promised to end this issue, but in government they’ve instead opted to kick the can down the road. The problem is they want voters to believe they’re solving the problem even as they refuse to do so.

As an example of this in action, please see the following from Labour’s minister of state for housing and planning:

Leasing the truth

The problem with leasehold properties is they combine the cost of purchasing a house with the downsides of not actually owning one, as HG wrote for the Canary in January this year:

Advertisement

Most flats in the UK are leasehold, along with some shared ownership houses.

Freehold means a resident owning their property and the land it is built on. On the other hand, leasehold means owning the property for a fixed period, while still paying ground rent to the landlord, who either owns the building (such as a block of flats) or the land.

When the lease ends, ownership returns to the landlord.

In comparison, commonhold provides freehold ownership for flats or other interdependent buildings.

Pennycook said he’d ‘end’ leasehold in parliament:

Advertisement

He also made it clear it would happen “over the course of this Parliament” — i.e. that it would happen before the next elections in 2029:

Do ‘abolish’ and ‘end’ mean the same thing in every context?

Advertisement

No.

But they both clearly give the impression that leasehold would no longer exist under Labour — i.e. that it would ‘end’.

Demonstrating that this position is unpopular with the party’s own members, Labour Party activist Matt Lismore said the following:

I don’t think people realise that creating a 2 tier flats market with leasehold (existing) and commonhold (new) could crush leasehold property values further.

That would place leading UK banks in the position of holding huge volumes of mortgages where the borrower is in negative equity.

Advertisement

This wouldn’t be an issue if defaults stay low, but should a significant number of leaseholders start defaulting, banks could be in considerable bother, causing significant harm to the UK economy.

Further, if leasehold flat values fall after commonhold comes in, even more properties will fall into the service charge > 1% of value bracket, making them largely unmortgageable.

Matt Pennycook, it is vital that we don’t create a 2 tier market in flats – it has the capacity to have significant knock on consequences.

Labour — collapse in real-time

Lismore isn’t voicing a niche opinion or unwarranted concern. If you want to see what’s happening to leasehold properties in the UK, simply look at the property market:

Advertisement

To be fair, houses should be cheaper. At the same time, these houses aren’t cheaper because we’ve fixed the housing problem; they’re cheaper because no one wants to live in them them.

Labour aren’t fixing a problem in a sensible and incremental way; they’re allowing an entirely new problem to fester to keep property developers happy. And it’s going to result in misery for anyone who owns one of the nearly 5 million leasehold properties in the UK.

Featured image via author

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Green Party ‘s Ali provides brilliant take on race and social class

Published

on

Green Party 's Ali provides brilliant take on race and social class

The Co-Deputy Leader of the Green Party Mothin Ali has released a beautiful and moving video about his upbringing in Sheffield, conveying some vital truths about the class unity needed to take on Britain’s establishment.

It starts with Ali on a bus talking about a recent encounter in London:

So, I was in London the other day and this bloke, he comes right up to me. He says, “Why don’t you eff off back to where you came from?” And you know what? I thought I will. So, I came back here to Sheffield.

From there, we hear about Ali’s upbringing amidst the heavy industry of the 1980s, and the working class unity that existed across racial groups, even if prejudice wasn’t entirely absent from British life at the time. He recalls how the community was shattered by the policies of Margaret Thatcher. Now 40 years later in a deindustrialised society, the social fragmentation caused by those neoliberal policies has seen racist attitudes skyrocket.

Advertisement

Ali: we must work “side by side” to shatter chains of capitalism

As Ali says:

That man in London, when he saw me, all he saw was my beard, my topi, my brown skin. Like it was me. Like it was me to blame. All he saw was our differences. So I get why we had to come back here to remember what we’d lost. It wasn’t just the work or the factories, it was something else.

In the past, Ali points out, when two such people met:

We saw those chains, chains of hardship and debt. And we knew that the only way we’d ever lift them was together, side by side.

Thatcher knew that sites of industry — coal mines, steel mills, factories — were crucial locations for building class consciousness. Where people of different ethnicities and religions met and saw a common cause with one another, and where trade unions provided a political education on class realities. The employer was the enemy, not the person with a different skin colour beside you on the job. It was your employer who was underpaying you, overworking you, disregarding your safety, and taking most of the profit for themselves.

Thatcher referred to the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) as “the enemy within“. However, in reality it was all trade unions, and all sites of working class organisation that she wanted to crush. That she surely did, and instituted massive waves of privatisation that saw vital national assets sold off to corporations.

Advertisement

Green Party — strong left-wing communicators key to beating back the right

After four decades, the results of this project are clear. Sky high energy prices, a barely functional health service, rivers overflowing with shit and a society where it seems nothing works any more. In the vacuum filled by the fading of trade unions, racist demagogues like those of Reform and Restore have been able to sell fictions about the causes of these problems, blaming migrants and Muslims. Overt racism thought to be virtually extinct has returned in appalling fashion. Mothin Ali is no stranger to this, having been the victim himself on more than one occasion.

George Monbiot has often cited the importance of story telling in political projects, and bemoaned the left’s inability to match the right in this regard. Fortunately, the Green Party have now proven themselves to be effective tellers of simple truths, delivered in an emotionally powerful way. Similarly, leader Zack Polanski is an outstanding communicator, rarely caught flat-footed in an interview.

In a social media age, these are essential skills for beating back racist snake oil salesmen intent on distracting us from our true enemies — bosses, landlords and the craven politicians that back them.

Featured image via the Canary

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Israel lobby’s Green ‘WhatsApp antisemitism’ smear is itself antisemitic. Again

Published

on

Israel lobby's Green 'WhatsApp antisemitism' smear is itself antisemitic. Again

The hard-right, ultra-Zionist and genocide-denying Telegraph‘s claim of an ‘antisemitic’ Green party WhatsApp group shows the Israel lobby’s desperation to halt the surge of Jewish leader Zack Polanski’s party. And it appears, yet again, that the Israel lobby has no qualms about being antisemitic in its tactics.

Green activists called Jews ‘abominations’ in leaked WhatsApp chat

Blares the rag’s headline. It then claims that — with emphases added by Skwawkbox:

Green Party activists described Jewish people as “an abomination to this planet” in anti-Semitic WhatsApp messages, The Telegraph can reveal.

One member of the Greens for Palestine group, a Left-wing faction in the Green Party, said Jews “murder, bomb and starve” children.

Another claimed the arson attack on four ambulances owned by a Jewish charity in Golders Green, north London, on Monday had been a “false flag” operation, suggesting it could have been carried out by Jewish people.

Advertisement

A Green council candidate shared posts on social media, making the same claim.

But the paper’s examples show next to none of this — and the “abomination” in the chats is unequivocally Zionism. Most Zionists are not Jewish and many Jews are anti-Zionists, though one ill-advised comment does discuss frustration at being ‘forced’ to use the term ‘Zionism’ in discussions of it. Unsurprisingly, the article quickly falls apart under scrutiny and ends up only being propped up by the manufactured outrage of known Israel-funded pressure groups.

Israel lobby doesn’t purposefully miss the point

First of all, even the Telegraph’s own screenshots make absolutely clear that the topic of the discussion is Zionism — the racist political ideology that privileges Jewish colonisers over indigenous Palestinians:

The article’s central claim then falls apart like a two-pound suit. Nobody in the group says that “Jewish people” are an abomination. The screenshot makes plain, to an honest reading, that the comment is referring to “Jewish supremacists” — in other words, Zionists:

Advertisement

Zionism is racism

Zionism is an ethno-supremacist political philosophy — even to its majority of non-Jewish advocates who make it central to their so-called ‘Christian nationalism’. Israel is a racist, apartheid state perpetrating genocide in Gaza and trying to steal the lands of Lebanese, Syrian and other people based on a presumption that they are religiously and ethnically entitled to it. Its advocates believe they are entitled even to murder children to achieve this goal.

They have already murdered and maimed hundreds of thousands of children in Gaza and want to slaughter the children of their opponents in Iran. Zionism has rightly been described as one of the biggest dangers to humanity — and is shamelessly demonstrating why in the series of atrocities and global crises Israel is creating.

After these two screenshots, the best that hack Sabrina Miller — herself a notorious pro-Israel agitator even as a student — can come up with is highlighting discussions about information security and whether Israel-linked apps can be trusted.

That and some quotes from the so-called ‘Campaign Against Antisemitism’ (CAA) — which is funded by Israel and notorious for its attacks on Muslims to promote pro-Israel narratives. CAA’s charitable status has been under investigation for the blatantly political nature of its activities — but of course, the Telegraph leaves that out. Its chief executive Gideon Falter was exposed making up claims of being prevented from ‘crossing a road’ because of a pro-Palestine march — and folded embarrassingly under scrutiny.

Advertisement

Israel lobby is antisemitic

As so often with the Israel lobby, the latest attack spills over into… yep, antisemitism. By deliberately and falsely conflating Jews with Zionism, as if the two are inseparable, it breaches any reasonable definition of antisemitism. Including the unreasonable one the Israel lobby pushes to protect Israel. It’s very, very far from the first time and it certainly won’t be the last.

So far, so predictable from the Israel lobby, which is so desperate to prevent the Greens standing up as expressly anti-Zionist that it has apparently capped weeks of embarrassing attacks with a ‘DDoS’ tech attack on the party’s conference today, 28 March 2026 to try to prevent a vote on it.

Featured image via ArabProgress

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Why some Democrats want to shut off Hasan Piker’s ‘megaphone’

Published

on

Why some Democrats want to shut off Hasan Piker’s ‘megaphone’

Hasan Piker’s new role as a midterm surrogate and potential influence on the 2028 presidential race is driving a wedge in the Democratic Party.

After POLITICO reported that Piker, the far left political streamer with millions of followers, will stump in Michigan with Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed next month, his history of divisive comments launched an avalanche of criticism from Republicans and Democrats.

Two of El-Sayed’s opponents, state Sen. Mallory McMorrow and Rep. Haley Stevens, lambasted El-Sayed, with Stevens telling Jewish Insider “someone who’s campaigning with someone like that is not going to win in Michigan” and McMorrow saying Piker “says extremely offensive things in order to generate clicks and views and followers, which is not entirely different from somebody like Nick Fuentes,” comparing him to the antisemite nationalist influencer.

Piker’s rise as a Democratic influencer and surrogate coincides with the party’s long search for a path out of the wilderness, particularly in recapturing young men.

Advertisement

Piker is scheduled to appear on a livestreamed, “Choose Your Fighter” rally organized by Progressive Victory at 6:30 p.m. Saturday. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) is among the list of attendees. Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Planter was originally billed as a participant, but he pulled out of the event. (A person familiar told POLITICO that Platner’s planned appearance was a miscommunication.) And on Sunday, Piker will rally with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) at a tax-the-rich rally.

The question over Piker’s prominence also comes as both the Republican and Democratic parties ask fundamental questions about how big their tents should be.

But it’s the out-of-power Democrats who face the higher short-term stakes.

In an interview with POLITICO, Piker downplayed accusations that have been leveled against him, like center-left think tank Third Way, whose leaders wrote in a WSJ op-ed that Piker had a history of anti-American, antiwomen, anti-Western and antisemitic comments. Piker said Third Way was “losing their institutional relevance.” He also said he’s merely channeling, not changing, the attitudes of the Democratic base.

Advertisement

“I’m a megaphone, right?” Piker told POLITICO. “There are a lot of Barbs and Deborahs out there in Minneapolis, for example, that have never encountered me, and yet they share that frustration with the failures of establishment liberalism all the same.”

Piker said those type of voters view Democrats as “ineffective, inept.” “It’s not because they tune into The HasanAbi broadcast every day,” he said, referencing his Twitch channel. “They arrive at that conclusion because the Democrats lost to Trump twice. With the same principle that you got to pivot to the mythical moderate center.”

This isn’t Piker’s first rodeo: He livestreamed an interview last year with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders before one of the duo’s “Fighting Oligarchy” rallies. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani also sat for an interview with Piker last year.

But Piker’s increasing coziness with prominent Democrats also comes as some in the party argue he poses a problem for them.

Advertisement

“Piker is close to — but not over — the Nick Fuentes line, where going on his show itself is indefensible,” Third Way co-founder Matt Bennett, who’s been sounding the alarm about Democrats’ affiliation with Piker, told POLITICO. Bennett added that Democrats “take on all of his baggage if they don’t overtly reject” him, which he said is “dangerous because it empowers the right and gives them an incredibly powerful tool to hit Democrats with that’s very bad.”

But some Democrats like Khanna argue that the party needs to assemble a broad coalition. “That must include engaging with Israel critics like Hasan Piker as Pod Save hosts have done and many progressive candidates have done,” Khanna told POLITICO. “Of course, I disagree strongly with some of his statements and point that out. But cancelling people or shaming people like Hasan Piker, Shawn Ryan or Theo Vonn is not the answer.”

The debate over Piker’s place within the party is set to play out across the 2028 field, too.

POLITICO surveyed 14 potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidates, asking whether they would appear on a livestream with Piker if invited. Only three definitively said they would.

Advertisement

Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) all said they wouldn’t go on Piker’s stream through spokespeople. “Mr. Piker’s terrible comments about Jewish people, 9/11, and other areas aren’t the kinds of conversations Cory participates in and he will not be joining him on his stream,” an aide to Booker told POLITICO.

So who would appear on Piker’s stream? Khanna, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Rahm Emanuel. (Ocasio-Cortez has already appeared, but a spokesperson did not return a request for comment).

“It’s not on the agenda right now, but the Governor has never shied away from debating anyone, anywhere,” Newsom spokesperson Izzy Gardon told POLITICO.

Said an Emanuel spokesperson: “Rahm is always willing to have difficult conversations with anyone about the future of the country, and to tell people he disagrees with why they’re wrong.”

Advertisement

Aides to Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear declined to comment. Aides to former Vice President Kamala Harris, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Maryland Gov. Wes Moore and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker did not respond.

Asked about some of his controversial past comments, Piker didn’t retract any of them. Asked if he had ever misspoken: “Misspoken? No. Taken out of context? Absolutely.”

He did point to one particular quote of his about the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, which he noted often comes up when he’s criticized.

“One of the quotes that they love floating around is the Oct. 7 quote where I said, like, rape’s happening, like the conversation around, like, sexual violence taking place on October 7 doesn’t change the dynamic for me. And I was talking about genocide. I was like, this doesn’t justify genocide at all,” Piker said.

Advertisement

As for the other quotes he catches heat for? “No, I stand by them,” Piker said.

So who does Piker like for 2028? He’s got a short list. “I said [Georgia Sen. Jon] Ossoff will be my dark horse pick, depending on how he presents himself if he has ambitions for higher office. I do love [UAW President] Shawn Fain personally. I like an outsider pick. I like Ro Khanna. I like AOC. I actually like [Sen.] Chris Van Hollen, quite a bit as well, even.”

And the criticism cuts both ways. “At the end of the day, of course, I have disagreements with every single one of these candidates,” Piker said. “No candidate is perfect.”

An adviser to one potential 2028 candidate, granted anonymity to appraise Piker’s influence, told POLITICO they expect Piker to be a “gatekeeper” in the primary. But Piker isn’t sure how much sway he’ll hold.

Advertisement

“Who knows how things change?” he said. “I mean, this is a very dynamic environment.”

Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO’s Playbook newsletter.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Great Western FC, our lads, are in the semi-finals!

Published

on

Great Western FC, our lads, are in the semi-finals!

Today is a massive day for Swindon. Great Western FC, the team we very proudly sponsor, steps onto the pitch for an integral semi-final today. For many, this is just 90 minutes of football. But for this small club, it is another chapter in a stunning survival story that defies every statistic thrown at the working class. Today, our lads in the first team face Stratton at St Luke’s Academy at 3pm. And our reserves take on Coleview in the SDCFL Challenge Plate semi-final at Southbrook at 2pm.

We sponsor this tiny team because they represent everything the Canary stands for. The club is a sanctuary in a town where social fabric has been fucking shredded by years of neglect. This club is a lifeline for 75 men who have found brotherhood where the state offers only silence.

Advertisement

Great Western FC — a lifeline in a neglected town

The stakes are way higher than just a cup. In the UK, suicide remains the leading cause of death for men under 50. Great Western FC fights this crisis on the pitch every single week. They provide the pastoral care that broken councils and a crumbling NHS simply can’t deliver.

The founder, Jon, manages this entire operation whilst living with severe and chronic pain. He uses the beautiful noise of the club to drown out his own suffering. His leadership is a masterclass in mutual aid and support. As is that of his co-manager, Tom. While the FA reports that 96% of working class and grassroots clubs are struggling with rising costs, Great Western continues to kick ass both on and off the pitch. But even they are struggling.

Victory is more than getting higher on a scoreboard

The first team is facing Stratton, whilst the reserves battle Coleview in the semi-finals. Great Western have earned their spot in the semis through sheer struggle and persistence. They don’t have a corporate board or a billionaire behind them. They have us though, the poor bastards. And of course, they have each other. They have shared lifts, a thriving community and a spirit that cannot be bought.

Whatever the results today, these men have already won. They have built something authentic in a world that feels so fucking fake. We are fucking proud to have our name on their shirts.

Advertisement

Go get them lads.

Featured image provided via author

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Zack Polanski shows why the Daily Mail is harassing his family

Published

on

Poll of polls from October 2025 to March 2026

Zack Polanski has said that Daily Mail journalists are “going after” his family members. And according to him, there’s a very simple reason why; it’s because the Green Party is becoming a credible challenger to the establishment:

The Daily Fail

The poll above is from Verian. As Stats for Lefties explained, there’s a reason why the Greens just shot up by seven points:

Obviously you can’t put too much stock in any one poll, and some polls still have the Greens trailing behind Labour:

While individual polls may not be precise indicators, looking at all the polls over time does give an idea of how public opinion is shifting. As we can see from Politico’s poll of polls, the trend over the past 6 months has been that Reform are dipping while the Greens are climbing:

Poll of polls from October 2025 to March 2026

Another recent poll shows that the Greens have grown in popularity in London:

Zack Polanski — no limits

Polanski didn’t provide more information on the Daily Mail harassing his family members. At the same time, no one was surprised, because we’ve all seen how the corporate media operates in the UK. People have sent their solidarity accordingly:

It’s important to remember that the billionaire-owned press isn’t loyal to any specific party or politician. Instead, they’re loyal to a situation in which things constantly become more favourable for the rich.

Advertisement

Clearly the establishment sees Reform as the group best placed to manage this continuation, which is why the party is attracting millions of pounds in donations from greedy tax exiles.

Zack Polanski and the Greens are challenging the status quo, and the attacks against them will only amplify between now and the 2029 election.

Featured image via Barold / Stats for Lefties

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025