UK Politics

3107 readers

311 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
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.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

tom

GreatAlbatross

flamingos

frankPodmore@slrpnk.net

‘I hate tree huggers’: How Starmer apparently exploded over Labour’s green policy (www.independent.co.uk)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by jocanib@lemmy.world to c/uk_politics

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I thought this was a hoax the first time I saw this story. But apparently not. The man is becoming a parody of himself.

12ft.io link for those who cannot be arsed with the Indie: https://12ft.io/proxy?&q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk%2Fpolitics%2Flabour-green-climate-change-starmer-miliband-b2372012.html

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] dad 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those that prioritise preservation over progress have weaponised ecology to block development. They are sadly far from marginalised. For example a significant portion of NIMBYs abuse environmental law to block development from occurring near to them. You only have to look at the ban on on-shore wind for an example of this. People were worried about visual amenity, not ecology. That didn't stop them using ecology as part of their argument to get them banned.

[–] julietOscarEcho@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Exactly. Your example about onshore wind (bird conservation as a convenient figleaf) shows precisely that NIMBYs are not environmentalists at all, hence not in "group1" by definition.