this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
51 points (98.1% liked)

UK Politics

3242 readers
186 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Nobody who hung out with Epstein should be in important jobs because a) they were abusing underage girls and b) Epstein was producing kompromat by filming/photographing it, turning all these people into Russian assets. That goes for Trump too btw.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

More likely just plain old US assets tbh.

If Russia had all this intel on these old fucks then they'd have released it already.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

Why would they burn assets like that?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 hours ago

Any minute now a labour centrist type will be along to tell us that criticising Mandelson for his friendship with Epstein and all that implies is not pragmatic and is in fact unreasonable purity politics.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I'm glad journalists are starting to ask, but I'd rather they'd get to the point.

Surely it's very bad for British interests for us to send an ambassador to a country where said ambassador is almost certainly blackmailable by said country's intelligence agencies.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

British interests

You mistakenly think (understandably, because that's what we're taught, but that doesn't make it true) that those are your interests, or even society's interests, but they are neither. They are the interests of the owners of this country, the royals, the other gentry and land owners, and otherwise filthy rich. Theirs are the only interests the state serves.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Well my cynical side thinks that the government have thought about this and are absolutely fine with it because they actively want Britain to be servile little piggies to the US. My theory on Trump not bringing us into his stupid trade war is because we just give them so much already that inspiring the British public to get angry about it would cost the US far more than they could possibly gain.