Elon Musk plans US - UK war in 2025

[Jamiet99uk]

To deconstruct this in case anyone is even interested:

"Octavious had a meeting with Nick Clegg this week, during which he praised Donald Trump's campaign strategy (while not agreeing with all of Trump's policies), defended Elon Musk, and encouraged Clegg to use his political influence to dismantle Britain's railway network."

1. Octavious has previously declared his admiration and support for Nick Clegg; he has presumably *not* met Nick Clegg in person in the past week, *but* Nick Clegg is probably the kind of person that Octavious would happily have a friendly chat with. Therefore, by Octavian logic, it is perfectly okay for me to claim they had a meeting and present this as the truth.

2. Octavious has, in this thread, and other recent threads in the politics forum, defended Donald Trump's methods and even expressed what might be interpreted as praise for their effectiveness. He has pointed out that he is not necessarily a supporter of all of Trump's policy goals, (but I have addressed this in the brackets). Therefore since part 1 of the lie may be reasonably presented as truth by Octavian logic, it is similarly reasonable that during his fictitious meeting with Nick Clegg, if the topic of Donald Trump came up, he would make those remarks.

3. Octavious has defended Elon Musk from the harsher barbs of our criticism in this thread, so if (2) is reasonable to present as a version of the truth, so is the Musk part.

4. It's going back a bit further, but Octavious has previously stated that passenger-carrying railways should not exist in the UK. Therefore by Octavian logic we can reasonably suggest Octavious would advocate for such a policy if his meeting with Nick Clegg got onto the topic of public transport, and since we are allowed to claim that Octavious and Nick Clegg had a meeting, the final part of the assertion is also acceptable.

[Jamiet99uk]

The further problem is that if the original lie goes unchallenged, it can be cited later on as though it had been fact.

So later on I could make another claim:

"Octavious, who has been lobbying senior Lib Dems to slash rail funding and previously held meetings with Nick Clegg on the issue, had a meeting last week with Elon Musk, where they promised to replace the East and West Coast main lines with Musk's hyperloop technology with first class seating reserved for whites only."

[Octavious]

So what you're saying in a nutshell is, because the Tories failed to recognise that a Corbyn led Socialist government would be clearly superior to their own, that they are liars?

I refer you to Obiwan Kenobe's "from a certain point of view" speech in the Empire Strikes Back.

Anyone with a reasonable knowledge of the history of post-war UK politics knows that the Tory party are the class enemy of "ordinary hard-working people",

This is not truth. This is opinion.

Corbyn and McDonnell's fictional meeting with "the unions",

To quote from the Labour Party website

The Labour Party was formed out of the trade union movement to give working people their own political voice. The link from the workplace to the party through the affiliated trade unions is what makes it unique to this day. This link is more important than ever as we work together to tackle the urgent problems we face as a country, from stagnating wages to failing public services.

In what universe are the Labour Party leadership not having meetings with the unions? Seriously? I'd be astounded. It'd be like the Tories refusing to meet with business leaders.

"Octavious had a meeting with Nick Clegg this week, during which he praised Donald Trump's campaign strategy (while not agreeing with all of Trump's policies), defended Elon Musk, and encouraged Clegg to use his political influence to dismantle Britain's railway network."

I'd be delighted that you think I move in such circles. As far as the content of the fictional meeting, I'd say that the defending Musk comment goes against the broader truth of my opinion of Musk, but I'd be more than happy to have an opportunity to discuss the future of the rail network and have no problem whatsoever with the idea that I think Trump's campaign was very effective... because it was.

Seriously, mate... compared to most of the stuff you come out with that's pretty accurate

[Jamiet99uk]

So what you're saying in a nutshell is, because the Tories failed to recognise that a Corbyn led Socialist government would be clearly superior to their own, that they are liars?

That is not what I am saying. David Cameron is a liar because the things he said were demonstrably lies. They were not true. I cannot believe you do not understand what "lie" and "truth" mean.

To quote from the Labour Party website

The Labour Party was formed out of the trade union movement to give working people their own political voice. The link from the workplace to the party through the affiliated trade unions is what makes it unique to this day. This link is more important than ever as we work together to tackle the urgent problems we face as a country, from stagnating wages to failing public services.

In what universe are the Labour Party leadership not having meetings with the unions? Seriously? I'd be astounded. It'd be like the Tories refusing to meet with business leaders.

The meeting specifically mentioned by David Cameron was a fiction, a lie, an untruth, and this matters in the course of the overall narrative. If he was a sincere politician with a sherd of integrity, who had a serious point to make, why would he have to make up a series of lies (as he did, demonstrably) to make his point?

[Jamiet99uk]

Noted hyperloop supporter and public transport opponent Octavious had a meeting with Tommy Robinson this week where he agreed to donate £1,000 to a campaign to ban muslims from buses in the UK.

[Octavious]

What is the lie? Do you not believe that Corbyn and McDonnell had meetings with various unions? Do you not believe that in these discussions they talked about increasing the powers of unions in disputes? Is your problem here merely about the timing of the meeting? It's a lie because it may have happened in the previous fortnight rather than the previous week? Or it's a lie because Cameron can't be certain that flying pickets was specifically mentioned?

As for the Falklands, is it a lie because Corbyn hadn't literally given the Falklands to Argentina? Because I fully agree with you that he didn't have the power to do so being an opposition leader with limited popularity. But it is painfully obvious, unless you think that the Prime Minister had forgotten the most basic rules about how government works, that this was hyperbole. That the clear meaning, which I happen to believe is 100% true, is that the policy decisions favoured by Corbyn would (if put into practice) eventually lead to Argentine sovereignty over the Falklands.

Noted hyperloop supporter and public transport opponent Octavious had a meeting with Tommy Robinson this week where he agreed to donate £1,000 to a campaign to ban muslims from buses in the UK.

I'm confused now. That's just a series of highly unlikely lies without even a brief acquaintanceship with the truth. You really haven't understood anything I've said, have you?

[Jamiet99uk]

I'm confused now. That's just a series of highly unlikely lies without even a brief acquaintanceship with the truth. You really haven't understood anything I've said, have you?
[/quote]

[Jamiet99uk]

I started writing a very long reply but the website has fucked me.

I'll reply tomorrow. Octavious deserves response, right in his stupid face.

[Octavious]

I think it's fair to surmise that the only people remotely interested in this back and forth regarding a poorly remembered conversation of a fair few years ago are you and me .

But I look forward to seeing your reply nonetheless.

[kingofthepirates]

I'm here! it's good reading while I wait for my weekly manga chapters to drop lol

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

It's the intellectual battle of the century.

Watch as these two titans of tedium argue past one another about issues in UK politics that haven't mattered for years.

Oct "nothing bad ever happens" Tavious has trained his whole forum career for this fight. This great obfuscator of right wing wrongdoing is said to have perfected his "I don't support either side" schtick at last year's World Cup. His coach said he's been training his butt for months to ensure he can pull arguments out of it with ease in this historic match up.

Jamie "perpetual Armageddon" 99 UK enters the ring with a mental injury from his Gaza debates, but his post count attests to his ability to fight through the pain. Will his career-long strategy of predicting the worst possible outcomes finally yield the coveted "I told you so"? Betting markets aren't so sure, but the odds on a name-calling victory in the early rounds heavily favour this contender.

[kingofthepirates]

It's the intellectual battle of the century.

Watch as these two titans of tedium argue past one another about issues in UK politics that haven't mattered for years.

Oct "nothing bad ever happens" Tavious has trained his whole forum career for this fight. This great obfuscator of right wing wrongdoing is said to have perfected his "I don't support either side" schtick at last year's World Cup. His coach said he's been training his butt for months to ensure he can pull arguments out of it with ease in this historic match up.

Jamie "perpetual Armageddon" 99 UK enters the ring with a mental injury from his Gaza debates, but his post count attests to his ability to fight through the pain. Will his career-long strategy of predicting the worst possible outcomes finally yield the coveted "I told you so"? Betting markets aren't so sure, but the odds on a name-calling victory in the early rounds heavily favour this contender.

absolute cinema

[Jamiet99uk]

I'm confused now. That's just a series of highly unlikely lies without even a brief acquaintanceship with the truth. You really haven't understood anything I've said, have you?

Okay, here we go.

So, I started with statement #1:

"Octavious had a meeting with Nick Clegg this week, during which he praised Donald Trump's campaign strategy (while not agreeing with all of Trump's policies), defended Elon Musk, and encouraged Clegg to use his political influence to dismantle Britain's railway network."

Now, most of this is a mixture of half-truths and deliberate lies, but you described this as "pretty accurate" in general terms. You very clearly did not care that my mention of a meeting was a fiction, and you barely pushed back on the other content.

But what I have done here is strongly associate you with Nick Clegg, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump, and with a policy of dismantling the UK's rail network.

Statement #1 appears to meet the Octavian logic requirements of being in the general direction of the truth.

Then I followed up with statement #2:

"Octavious, who has been lobbying senior Lib Dems to slash rail funding and previously held meetings with Nick Clegg on the issue, had a meeting last week with Elon Musk, where they promised to replace the East and West Coast main lines with Musk's hyperloop technology with first class seating reserved for whites only."

Elon Musk is a noted proponent of so-called "Hyperloop" technology as an alternative to conventional high-speed rail. Also, Elon Musk has recently shown his very public support for ultra-right wing white nationalists and people who want to bring racial apartheid back to his birth country of South Africa. It is certainly within the "general direction of the truth" to say that Elon Musk has happily associated himself, in broad daylight, with some extremely racist people and groups.

Therefore, in statement #2 I have increased the emphasis on associating you with Elon Musk, as well as calling back to the "meeting with Nick Clegg" idea I advanced in statement #1. In statement #2, I evolved the "abolish railways" position into a hyperloop scheme of the kind Elon Musk might propose, and I sprinkled in some racism because Elon Musk is associated with racists, and I am now tarring you with that brush.

Statement #2 would seem outrageous in isolation. An obvious series of lies. BUT if we have persuaded the casual reader that Statement #1 was broadly true, which I believe by Octavian logic we have done, (though by JamieT logic obviously not, Statement #1 was a pack of lies and should have been shot down as such), THEN the casual reader may also be easily persuaded that Statement #2 might well be in the general direction of the truth.

Now I come out with Statement #3:

Noted hyperloop supporter and public transport opponent Octavious had a meeting with Tommy Robinson this week where he agreed to donate £1,000 to a campaign to ban muslims from buses in the UK.

Obviously utter horse shit. But if the casual reader has swallowed Statement #2, then it's only a small step to assuming that Statement #3 could be in the general direction of the truth. After all, Elon Musk is a very vocal supporter of Tommy Robinson. Tommy Robinson is an outright, bold as brass, in-your-face racist who would like all Muslims to be forcibly removed from the UK. The policy focus is still partly on public transport, and I have already, via Statement #2, associated you with a racist public transport policy being attributed to noted Tommy Robinson associate Elon Musk.

This is what the new ultra right does. This is how they work. They take small grains of truth and filter them into a package of lies. To resist such tactics we need to stand up and say "No, that's a lie" when we hear Statement #1. Because if we wait until Statement #3 it is too late, and it is MUCH harder to change people's minds.

THAT is why it is important to call out liars like David Cameron as soon as they start to fabricate lies to score political points.

THAT is why the truth matters. Not the "general direction" of the truth, in which a handful of deliberate, cynical lies can be excused. But the whole truth.

That was my point. That is why I differ from you so strongly on this.

[Octavious]

Ah, you're a subscriber to the slippery slope fallacy. You have explained your position well. I disagree.

[Jamiet99uk]

Ah, you're a subscriber to the slippery slope fallacy. You have explained your position well. I disagree.

I do not believe my position is fallacious but I suppose I have to acknowledge you for at least accepting I have articulated the problem that I see here.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

It's a disappointing day for debate fans as the second round grinds to a halt.

Jamie "99 problems and they're all existential" UK valiantly recovered after committing to a rather obtuse debate style. His core point just barely made it through intact, but the judges will surely dock him for his verboseness.

Oct "Right, do no wrong" Tavious parried with a decisive retort from the classic List of Fallacies (tm), but the judges are still reviewing the tape to see whether or not Slippery Slope (official lawn water slide sponsor of Shouty Seniors - UK edition) actually applies in this case.

Fans were disappointed that the exchange seems to have missed The Big Picture (official TV sponsor for Shouty Seniors - UK edition).

The season is still young! Oct will surely make more elaborate excuses for right wingers that seem to intentionally miss the forest for the trees. Jamie is reportedly already growing out his hair so there is more to set on fire in the next match. Don't forget to become a WebDip Gold donator to catch all the action.

[I'll stop doing this now lol]

[CaptainFritz28]

[I'll stop doing this now lol]

And it was just getting rather good...