Dirty money in cycling.

13

Comments

  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    In reality most people seem to pick a newspaper that they know can be relied on to validate and justify their own attitudes and beliefs, and when it comes to papers like The Daily Mail, Sun and Express, to validate and justify their ignorance and prejudices as well.
    You could more than likely add most of the mainstream newspapers to that list as well, as much as you would like to portray ignorance and prejudice isnt exclusive to right wing meadia orginisations.
    But most of the remaining 'mainstream' newspapers in the UK are also right of centre! (And what could be more 'mainstream’ than The Sun and The Daily Mail - going by sales at any rate).

    The only mainstream exceptions to the general right-of-centre bias in the UK press are The Independent, which is centrist, and The Guardian, which is centre / soft left. Are you saying that these also peddle ignorance and prejudice?

    Every mainstream paper of whicheber side of the political spectrum they sit on peddles ignorance and prejudice of a certain degree, anyone with half a brain knows that.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    Moray Gub wrote:
    Every mainstream paper of whicheber side of the political spectrum they sit on peddles ignorance and prejudice of a certain degree, anyone with half a brain knows that.
    True, the first thing someone on a journalism course learns is that bias always exists.

    But Murdoch is in such a dominant position in the UK that politicians require his blessing to become PM, that is not quite healthy. Still, it is not new. There is Berlusconi in Italy and France's top two newspapers are owned by arms dealers. Even Springfield has its sinister moguls...
    MrBurns.gif
  • top_bhoy
    top_bhoy Posts: 1,424
    yawn.....this thread belongs in a different forum.....even better, in a cyberskip. I can't believe it has got to 4 pages!!!!
    Click here to view Top_Bhoys Pedal Force:
    Click here to view Top_Bhoys RC2:
  • disquieting_museeuws
    disquieting_museeuws Posts: 601
    Going back to the original point, I remember Robert Millar commenting that yes, Le Groupement was a dodgy sponsor, but then so were all cycling team sponsors. I think Spanish outfit Santa Clara from the 90's turned out to be a front for drugs running?
  • Jez mon
    Jez mon Posts: 3,809
    Surely it's good that someone wants to invest in cycling during the economic downturn/credit crunch/depression/minor correction...

    TBH, Murdoch has far too much power for someone who wasn't elected in a official election (arguably the world elected him by buying/consuming his products, but that's neither here nor there). Note that if his personal politics where towards the left, I would say exactly the same thing.

    TBH, BikinigBernie's view of the right seems a tad harsh, isn't it enough to conclude that neither left nor right has a monopoly on good ideas, or indeed bad ones. Whilst he sees fit to conclude that the "BNP pro cycling team" would gain a lot of support, I ask him, would he have supported a Gulag pro cycling team? Of course not, follow anything, including Political tendencies to their so called "logical" conclusion and you often get madness.
    You live and learn. At any rate, you live
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    Moray Gub wrote:
    Every mainstream paper of whicheber side of the political spectrum they sit on peddles ignorance and prejudice of a certain degree, anyone with half a brain knows that.
    Thing is, much of the right-wing press, such as The Daily Mail, The Sun and The Express do so more than others, especially 'namby pamby liberal' papers such as The Guardian. Anyone with even two functioning brain cells knows that. :wink:

    http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/

    http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

    http://www.b3tards.com/u/140f53149919ac ... ss-big.gif
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    teagar wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    P.s the following discussion of the link between traditional right-wing and 'Authoritarian' (here termed 'Fascist' ) attitudes is taken from 'The Authoritarian Personality' by T.W Adorno et al and printed in 1950.

    …The general pattern we are investigating here is characterized by an all-pervasive feature. These subjects want no pity for the poor, neither here nor abroad. This trail seems to be strictly confined to high scorers and to be one of the most differentiating features in political philosophy. At this point, the interrelatedness of some ideas measured by the PEC [Political-Economic Conservatism] scale and certain attitudes caught by the F [Fascism] scale should be stressed. Abolition of the dole, rejection of state interference with the "natural" play of supply and demand on the labor market, the spirit of the adage "who does not work, shall not eat" belong to the traditional wisdom of economic rugged individualism and are stressed by all those who regard the liberal system as being endangered by socialism. At the same time, the ideas involved have a tinge of punitiveness and authoritarian aggressiveness which makes them ideal receptacles of some typical psychological urges of the prejudiced character…

    The attitude of indifference to the lot of the poor together with admiration for rich and successful people sheds light on the potential attitude of the high scorers toward the prospective victims of fascism in a critical situation. Those who humiliate mentally those who are down-trodden anyway, are more than likely to react the same way when an outgroup is being "liquidated."
    It's sixty years old and discussing issues in politics which may bear the same name but carry different meanings today. Just because it sounds authoritative doesn't mean it is.
    But human psychology hasn't changed for tens of thousands of years and the passing of time has shown that the work of Adorno was remarkably authoritative. Sure, some terminology has changed, from 'fascist' to ‘Authoritarian’ or 'Hierarchist', and it is now recognised that the right-wing mindset is a genetic trait rather than the product of upbringing, but the general features of this personality type that Adorno identified have been validated by extensive additional research since the 1950's.

    The Transport Research Laboratory even published a report a few years back entitled ‘Drivers’ perceptions of cyclists’ which concluded that the poor treatment cyclists receive on Britain’s roads (and in turn the way cyclists are demonised in the Britain’s right-wing press, especially in papers such as The Daily Mail) can be explained in terms of social identity theory and the way cyclists in the UK are perceived to constitute a low-status ‘out group’. Will Storr, writing in The Observer of 4 June 2006, accurately summarised the findings of Drivers' perceptions of cyclists as follows:

    A recent report for the government commissioned by the Transport Research Foundation found that drivers treat cyclists as an 'out-group'. According to social-identity theory, this means that there is a multi-forked bias against us, which takes the form of that pernicious trident of hate - discrimination, stereotyping and prejudice.

    So, in the head of a typical driver, subconsciously and automatically, things like these happen: the behaviour of the worst cyclist is used to judge them all; any cash the council visibly spends on them seems maddeningly unfair; any accident is the cyclist's fault; when making a decision, the motorist puts the needs of other motorists first; any behaviour at all that is 'different' to the driver's own is wrong. And so on. These are precisely the same primeval mental sparks that lead to football hooliganism, gang warfare and racism. Provocative and hateful newspaper reports about 'two-wheeled terrorists' merely stir up tribalism - basic, brutal and bad. It's the most dangerous and atrocious human impulse there is.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Thing is, much of the right-wing press, such as The Daily Mail, The Sun and The Express do so more than others, especially 'namby pamby liberal' papers such as The Guardian. Anyone with even two functioning brain cells knows that. :wink:

    So I take it you read the Mail, Sun and Express quite regularly to challenge your beliefs?
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    Jez mon wrote:
    ...I ask him, would he have supported a Gulag pro cycling team?
    So, what makes you think that Stalin was a bona-fide socialist? I would say that Stalin was about as much of a true socialist as Hitler was with his so-called 'National Socialism'!
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    Every mainstream paper of whicheber side of the political spectrum they sit on peddles ignorance and prejudice of a certain degree, anyone with half a brain knows that.
    Thing is, much of the right-wing press, such as The Daily Mail, The Sun and The Express do so more than others, especially 'namby pamby liberal' papers such as The Guardian. Anyone with even two functioning brain cells knows that. :wink:

    http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/

    http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

    http://www.b3tards.com/u/140f53149919ac ... ss-big.gif

    No the Graun doesn't do it less than other papers, it is simply that it's opinions coincide with your own.


    http://www.anorak.co.uk/media/200171.html

    http://factcheckingpollyanna.blogspot.com/

    Oh my! I can find websites to back up my opinion too! Doesn't make it right though... I think what we have here is a classic case of needing ot agree to disagree.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • antfly
    antfly Posts: 3,276
    What about Chairman Mao, was he a socailist?
    Smarter than the average bear.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Jez mon wrote:
    ...I ask him, would he have supported a Gulag pro cycling team?
    So, what makes you think that Stalin was a bona-fide socialist? I would say that Stalin was about as much of a true socialist as Hitler was with his so-called 'National Socialism'!

    Whoa, someone mentioned Hitler. Didn't someone say that the minute Hitler is mentioned
    the discussion is over? Or something like that? Some sort of rule / theory?
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    iainf72 wrote:
    So I take it you read the Mail, Sun and Express quite regularly to challenge your beliefs?
    I do take a look at the web versions from time to time, usually only to find yet more hateful rants about immigrants, 'lycra louts' and 'dole scroungers', but I would never stoop to buying a paper copy.

    In any case its no secret what The Daily Mail stand for. According to its editor Paul Dacre it stands for:

    'conservatism and the traditional right, Britain's past and British values, America, Ulster unionism, Euroscepticism, capitalism and big business, the countryside, Christianity and family values.'

    Conversely, it is essentially hostile to:

    'Labour, European federalism, the state and state spending, mass immigration, minority rights, multiculturalism, alternative lifestyles, abortion, and progressiveness in the education and the justice systems.'

    The comment about minority rights is particularly telling. No wonder the Mail is so opposed to cyclists thinking they have any sort of right to use 'the motorists' roads...
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    No the Graun doesn't do it less than other papers, it is simply that it's opinions coincide with your own.

    http://www.anorak.co.uk/media/200171.html

    http://factcheckingpollyanna.blogspot.com/
    So where exactly are The Guardian's attacks on minority groups, immigrants and so on?
  • afx237vi
    afx237vi Posts: 12,630
    dennisn wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    Jez mon wrote:
    ...I ask him, would he have supported a Gulag pro cycling team?
    So, what makes you think that Stalin was a bona-fide socialist? I would say that Stalin was about as much of a true socialist as Hitler was with his so-called 'National Socialism'!

    Whoa, someone mentioned Hitler. Didn't someone say that the minute Hitler is mentioned
    the discussion is over? Or something like that? Some sort of rule / theory?

    Godwin's law:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    BikingBernie wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    No the Graun doesn't do it less than other papers, it is simply that it's opinions coincide with your own.

    http://www.anorak.co.uk/media/200171.html

    http://factcheckingpollyanna.blogspot.com/
    So where exactly are The Guardian's attacks on minority groups, immigrants and so on?


    Umm you do know different people have different prejudices right? The Guardian's are bankers, Christians, the police, and the poor (they can tie themselves in a lovely knot over their "noble savage" view of the lower orders, they love them as kind of authentic lifestyle choice until they wear some ghastly clothes or eat at McDonalds).

    Like all newspapers their comment section is a horrible platform of nonsensical naval gazing devoid of any connection to reality.

    Incidentally I don't believe in minority rights. I believe in rights. The same ones for everyone.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    antfly wrote:
    What about Chairman Mao, was he a socailist?
    I had thought he was a communist, of sorts, rather than a socialist, but there you go.

    Thing is far too many people treat all forms of 'leftist' thought as being equivalent. If you want to know what I mean by 'socialism' think of such essentially socialist institutions as having a national health care system and social security benefits. With regards individuals, I would say that Tony Benn and Nye Bevan are fairly representative of what a ‘socialist’ looks like. For an example of a modern 'socialist' state, look to somewhere like Sweden or Denmark.
  • markwalker
    markwalker Posts: 953
    Disgruntled goat wrote

    Incidentally I don't believe in minority rights. I believe in rights. The same ones for everyone.

    +1, the liberals shout so loudly they almost invariably start being more authoritarian in style than the so called right.

    Their view becoming the only acceptable one, all others being associated with the BNP. Some of the things the BNP says (but not all) are good common sense and have a realworld element of practicality about them.
  • teagar
    teagar Posts: 2,100
    BikingBernie wrote:
    teagar wrote:
    It's sixty years old and discussing issues in politics which may bear the same name but carry different meanings today. Just because it sounds authoritative doesn't mean it is.
    But human psychology hasn't changed for tens of thousands of years and the passing of time has shown that the work of Adorno was remarkably authoritative. Sure, some terminology has changed, from 'fascist' to ‘Authoritarian’ or 'Hierarchist', and it is now recognised that the right-wing mindset is a genetic trait rather than the product of upbringing, but the general features of this personality type that Adorno identified have been validated by extensive additional research since the 1950's.

    Not quite sure where your transport research quoted legitimately comes into our discussion since it's about driving psychology and not politics.

    From my studies Ardono is considered particularly dated and is just representative of a particular post-war mentality that had long ebbed away by the end of the '80s.

    Not quite sure what research suggets that being right wing is genetic.

    Combining any political outlook with genetics (which is exactly what you're suggesting there) sounds pretty racist and far-fetched to me. I'd be pretty surprised that any such conclusion has been "validated".

    As far as I am concered, the "passing of time" has shown that Adorno is very dated and should be treated as an old marxist philosopher from the '50s, rather than an authority on any politics today, to which his ideas were neither informed by, nor intended for.
    Note: the above post is an opinion and not fact. It might be a lie.
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    different people have different prejudices right? The Guardian's are bankers, Christians, the police...
    Not more so than The Daily Mail it seems. 'Prejudice' or expressing legitimate concerns?

    Pictured: The shocking moment police officer grabs female climate change protester by the throat

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... hroat.html

    All 114 power station protesters released as arrests spark civil liberties row

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... s-row.html

    Caught on video... another G20 policeman lashes out at protester

    Disturbing new film piles more pressure on Met

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ester.html
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    BikingBernie wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    different people have different prejudices right? The Guardian's are bankers, Christians, the police...
    Not more so than The Daily Mail it seems. 'Prejudice' or expressing legitimate concerns?

    Pictured: The shocking moment police officer grabs female climate change protester by the throat

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... hroat.html

    All 114 power station protesters released as arrests spark civil liberties row

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... s-row.html

    Caught on video... another G20 policeman lashes out at protester

    Disturbing new film piles more pressure on Met

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ester.html


    What's your point caller? I agree with all of the above.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    markwalker wrote:
    I don't believe in minority rights. I believe in rights. The same ones for everyone.
    A nonsensical statement. For example, how would you balance the 'rights' of motorists to drive at any speed they though 'safe' and resonable, and the rights of vulnerable road users to use the public highway free of fear and the risk of death or serious injury?
    markwalker wrote:
    Some of the things the BNP says (but not all) are good common sense and have a realworld element of practicality about them.
    As you might have guessed, my earlier jibe about a BNP cycling team was in part directed at you. :wink:
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    different people have different prejudices right? The Guardian's are bankers, Christians, the police...
    Not more so than The Daily Mail it seems. 'Prejudice' or expressing legitimate concerns?

    Pictured: The shocking moment police officer grabs female climate change protester by the throat

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... hroat.html

    All 114 power station protesters released as arrests spark civil liberties row

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... s-row.html

    Caught on video... another G20 policeman lashes out at protester

    Disturbing new film piles more pressure on Met

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ester.html


    What's your point caller? I agree with all of the above.
    So is the Mail expressing 'prejudice' against the police here or not. If it is not, why when The Guardian raises concerns about the police is this evidence of 'prejudice'?
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    BikingBernie wrote:
    markwalker wrote:
    I don't believe in minority rights. I believe in rights. The same ones for everyone.
    A nonsensical statement. For example, how would you balance the 'rights' of motorists to drive at any speed they though 'safe' and resonable, and the rights of vulnerable road users to use the public highway free of fear and the risk of death or serious injury?

    :



    A motorist doesn't have the right to drive at any speed though... I didn't say anything like that did I? Likewise, nobody has the right to be free of fear. That's silly. That's like those people who think they have a right not to be offended.

    That was a good strawman you erected there though. Is it really a nonsensical statement to say that I beleive that everyone regardless of race, colour, creed, economic circumstance etc should enjoy the same protection and freedoms under the law? Or are you of the opinion that some people have more or different rights than others?
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    BikingBernie wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    BikingBernie wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    different people have different prejudices right? The Guardian's are bankers, Christians, the police...
    Not more so than The Daily Mail it seems. 'Prejudice' or expressing legitimate concerns?

    Pictured: The shocking moment police officer grabs female climate change protester by the throat

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... hroat.html

    All 114 power station protesters released as arrests spark civil liberties row

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... s-row.html

    Caught on video... another G20 policeman lashes out at protester

    Disturbing new film piles more pressure on Met

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ester.html


    What's your point caller? I agree with all of the above.
    So is the Mail expressing 'prejudice' against the police here or not. If it is not, why when The Guardian raises concerns about the police is this evidence of 'prejudice'?

    I didn't cite any of those as evidnece of prejudice did I? By the way, the mail and the graun can overlap in their reporting you know... It is possible.

    I would cite the CIF piece back in 2008 when the police foiled a plot to bomb airliners at Heathrow headlined "I bet you it will all turn out to be a hoax" arguing that no charges would ever be brought and the operation was a simple piece of racist scarmongering by the security services.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • BikingBernie
    BikingBernie Posts: 2,163
    teagar wrote:
    Not quite sure what research suggets that being right wing is genetic.

    Altemeyer (1988) conceptualized the authoritarian as a person highly dependent upon a strong group, demanding high ideological conformity. The Right Wing Authoritarianism scale (RWA) was developed by Altemeyer (1988) to measure the three reliable facets of authoritarianism: conventionalism, i.e., rigid conformity to group norms, submission to higher status individuals, and aggression toward out-groups and unconventional group members. The emergence of an authoritarian personality appears to be unrelated to intellectual ability or socioeconomic status. Altemeyer believed this personality type was the product of a development history of harsh parental discipline acquired through social learning. However, a study of 39 pairs of monozygotic (identical) and 38 pairs of dizygotic (fraternal) adult twins reared apart and 423 pairs of monzygotic and 434 pairs of dizygotic adult twins reared together indicates that genetic factors account for at least 50% of the phenotypic variance and unshared environment for 35% (McCourt, Bouchard, Lykken, Tellegen, & Keyes, 1999). The hypothesis that authoritarianism derives from aspects of the rearing environment was not supported by this study. Nor was the RWA trait related to general cognitive ability. It appears to be primarily influenced by genetic factors as well as by unique environmental factors. The superficial perspective, that the family environment is an important influence is due to its confounding with genetic relationships.

    http://www.ulm.edu/~palmer/Box%208.htm
  • markwalker
    markwalker Posts: 953
    edited August 2009
    [quote="BikingBernie"]
    markwalker wrote:
    I don't believe in minority rights. I believe in rights. The same ones for everyone.
    A nonsensical statement. For example, how would you balance the 'rights' of motorists to drive at any speed they though 'safe' and resonable, and the rights of vulnerable road users to use the public highway free of fear and the risk of death or serious injury?

    its simple, people are part of a society that affords rights but in return the same people have responsibilities. not a popular concept for liberal thinkers I know.
    markwalker wrote:
    Some of the things the BNP says (but not all) are good common sense and have a realworld element of practicality about them.
    As you might have guessed, my earlier jibe about a BNP cycling team was in part directed at you. :wink:[/quote]

    as the song said "I bet you thought that post was about you" and yes i picked up on it and, as you possibly hoped, started to contribute in a flame grilled way. :)
  • markwalker
    markwalker Posts: 953
    must learn how to do the quotes thing
  • dulldave
    dulldave Posts: 949
    Has anyone mentioned the Nazis yet?

    If not, good show. 5 pages and no Nazis.
    Scottish and British...and a bit French
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    dulldave wrote:
    Has anyone mentioned the Nazis yet?

    If not, good show. 5 pages and no Nazis.

    You missed it. Page 4 - BikingBernie mentioned Hitler.

Categories