That'd be political suicide for the next election. Labour backing a second referendum in rhe 2019 election was one of the major causes of the Tory win. That entire election became a one issue election where the tories could portray themselves as the party protecting brexit. They didn't really have anything else positive to campaign on so being able to effectively make the election about one issue was a huge win for the Tories and a huge L for Labour.

Labour will never hand the tories the tools to unify their base over brexit again.

I think the kinda difference is that most middle age and young voters see the "elderly being radicalised" issue as being one that eventually solves itself.

Whilst the youth being radicalised is a problem that's going to be a problem as long as you live. That makes it scarier.

People kind of forget that the left was split down the middle on the EU with many leftists wanting to have a similar relationship to the EU as Norway does.

You can argue that was naive, and for sure I'd say the majority of leave voters where not voting leave based on a socialist objection to the Capitalist EU; but there definitely was a large portion that did.

So it wasn't like 50percent of the country bought the extreme right coolaid.

Technically a draw then!

In political theory there is a concept called "economic polarisation" I.e. the argument that in economic instability or recession the electorate polarises to the left and right.

At its most basic the centre is the status quo. Modify and incrementally improve the system but effectively keep it the same. This is politically enticing when things are going well, but when things are going bad maintaining the status quo doesn't sound as good.

The far left and far right are by comparison both transformative politics. They want to replace the old system with something new. Ofcourse what they want to change the system too is completely different but the fact is both of them are offering change. When things are going bad and the electorate is wanting someone to fix it you'll see a natural drift towards these two extremes. Hence rhe term polarisation.

There also seems to be a historical precident that the centre right sees the far right as controllable. We saw this with Von Papen in 1930s Germany thinking he could control Hitler, we see this with the republican party cosying up to the tea party in the early 2010s. In the latter case however the republican party ended up not controlling and exploiting the far right but ending up beholden and eventually taken over by it. It played with fire and lost and the result has been that the far right has access to means and capital to push its agenda.

Meanwhile the centre left has always seen the far left as another enemy. It doesn't see them as an ally but rather something that intrinsically threatens its position as "the leader of social progress" again we can see this happen in interwar Germany where the SDP (the centre left party) saw the German Communist party as its biggest enemy and was completely oblivious to the threat of the right wing until it was too late. They where politically preoccupied with "winning the ideological war of the left"

Tl;Dr hard times polarise the electorate. It's not that the far right is intrinsically more attractive than the far left during these times, but political tendencies at least in the west, tend to mean the far right has an easier time gaining access to the apparatus neccessary to push its agenda whilst the far left tends to struggle.

Also just to clarify far left doesn't automatically mean communism and far right doesn't automatically mean Fascism. The left could be anarchists and the right could be extreme economic libertarianism for example. We saw in the early 2000s and 2010ss that there was a huge growth in libertarianism amongst the right, and that the latter more authoritarian right was initially being referred to as the alt right to differentiate it from this. Over time though the right wing libertarian movement appeared to stall and the alt right become the dominant far right ethos in the west.

Imagine you're on holiday just trying to enjoy the beach and your wife decides to tell her friend your staring at her to try and shame her.

I'd be so furious. "So you've decided to make me look like a pervert just to shame your friend?"

Like when you say a joke no one hears you then someone says the exact same joke louder and everyone laughs

Betting it all on red. Was it the Holy Vows one. Good feeling about that one.

You know what ramp it up to ten percent chance if its a literal newborn cub.

What lion though. I bet there has to be at least one geriatric, sickly ass, 3 legged, half comatose lion I'd stand a 5 percent chance against.

Bestofredditupdate post incoming when the next update finds that OP caught his arena partner cheating and playing DK/disc priest with his own brother.

Trade isn't a matter of morality its a matter of national survival. No country can really function without it.

America was supplying communist Russia with arms before it ever even entered ww2. Neither of them would argue that meant they where agreeing with the others political morality but simply that their respective situations made the deal a necessity. Russia for its continued existence and America to defend its international goals.

For a really crappy analogy, me getting a mortgage to buy a house doesn't mean I am morally complicit with whatever shady stuff the bank has done. Its simply something I need to do because of the economic situation I find myself in.

The Aemond one doesn't look so bad. It isn't the best casting but it isn't the worst. Puberty can make for some drastic changes between boy and man.

But Aegon simply doesn't work. It's also weird because the actor doesn't even look that much older. And the young Aegon is clearly already going through puberty. So it doesn't just feel like "I can't believe this kid turned into that adult" but also like "how has this young man turned into a completely different looking ever so slightly less young young man"

To be fair the complete collapse happens under Manduro. How much of that can be ascribed to Chavez is debatable.

Trade isn't the same thing as capitalism and existed long before capitalism.

Its some weird modern day conflation that they're one and the same.

Thank god I'm scouse and can just laugh at this because if I was an actual England fan I'd be going absolutely mental right now.

This entire tournament has been an utter embarrassment for England so far.

Yeah I hate how they present this as though it's some long lost art we can no longer make.

We know how to make this stuff. It's just weaker and more expensive. There's probably a few edge cases we could be using it in that we don't but as a whole, the concrete systems we use now are just more fit for purpose.

We don't build a skyscraper expecting nor needing it to still be standing in 500 years.

The one thing that is always forgotten is this. That and the fact regardless of whether you agree with it or not, Corby didn't want a second referendum,Keir did.

However at the labour conference the party members voted for a second referendum and Corbyn was basically forced to either support it or resign. Unlike the conservatives the Labour Party is beholden to its members. Corbyn could just ignore it.

So he ran on an second referendum even though it wasn't his personal belief. Got slaughtered and then rhe entire debacle got presented as a failure of Corbyn rather than a failure of the Labour Party as a whole to read the feeling of the general British population.

Then Keir, who was the biggest supporter of a second referendum, lands all the blame on Corbyn. It just was rather hypocritical.

I don't blame Keir for switching to be against a second referendum, the writing was on the wall after the last election that supporting that was toxic for the Labour Party.

But the opportunistic way it was used to put all the blame on Corbyn, and then morphed into a "corbyn lost the election because he was corbyn" to then discredit anyone on the left side of the party has been horrible.

Peanut butter AND Nutella though is a god tier sweet sandwich though.

Brothers peanut butter and Nutella need not be enemies. There is room for both on God's bountiful pleasant sandwich

It was his catchphrase

Yeah we went from being one of the best countering attacking teams to feeling utterly toothless.

Used to feel like when the opposition had a corner they where more in danger of being scored on than we where.

Kinda the same reason I keep some absolute tragedy of human beings added on Facebook. Not because I'm friends with them but because it's near impossible not to watch their highly public drama unfold.

I honestly think Hydrogen Sonata is a Swan song novel. I don't know enough about Banks to know if he knew it was his last novel. But it definitely feels like its wrestling with the authors thoughts on trying to grasp for meaning amid an increasing feeling of pointlessness.

Your right the novel does feel as though it's a big build up to no payoff but it's obviously intentional and I just can't help but feel that the novel is a window into Banks own soul in a way perhaps previous novels have not been. On that merit aline it is utterly captivating, distressing and wonderful.

This couples therapy bills is going to pay of some therapists mortgage

Then we can yell at clouds because there are now people who don't get this reference