Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Constantine
RTL
I liked your responses.
There are broadly two classes of folks who post on this forum.
The great majority of this forum's members have sincere and positive views, wish to improve matters, and work hard to build their respective parties up. Whatever their party, I respect their patriotism and hard work.
Then there is this small minority of ... social misfits, who do not get on with their fellow men and who take refuge in decrying the hard work of others. Some of these are sad men with nothing better to do, but a few are simply idle layabouts living on public welfare, who hate to see others working to improve the common good. They say of course that in trying to undermine our patriotic parties, they are simply 'holding public figures to account', or some such nonsense. Well, be damned with them!
Regards, Andrew
|
This post reveals much about its author who presumes, without adducing a shred of objective evidence, to classify those who post on this forum in order to bolster his own ego.
According to Andrew, there are 'broadly' two classes. The first, comprises more than 2,450 members having 'sincere and positive views, wish to improve matters and work hard to build their respective parties up'! Would it be unreasonable to conclude that Andrew regards himself as being in this virtuous class? From this we can conclude that anyone without a party cannot be within this class. So there you have it, all you non-joiners [and we know who many of you are - I could list a number myself!], you must be in the other 'broad' class!
The second class is to be disparaged as much as possible. First, they are not merely a minority, but a 'small minority'.
Second, they are 'social misfits' . . . well they must be, they offer opinions with which Andrew disagrees! [Incidentally, anyone encountered a 'social misfit' who does get on with his fellow man? Bit of tautology here in the cause of emphasising how reprehensible these individuals are.]
Third, some [but, apparently, not all] of this 'small minority of social misfits' are "sad men with nothing better to do". Unfortunately, Andrew's emotional outburst omits to tell us either what they do or what they have nothing better to do????
Fourth, "a few of some of this small minority" are really to be deprecated - allegedly they are "simply idle lay-abouts living on public welfare"! The obvious implications here are: (1) this undefined 'public welfare' is invariably reprehensible; and (2) that those on 'public welfare' are ALL 'idle lay-abouts'!
Fifth, presuming to see into the minds of this "few of some of the small minority", Andrew informs us that they "hate to see others working for the common good" whatever that presumed 'common good' may be!
Well Andrew, you may think that, overcome by a desire to expound your prejudiced and prejudicial, sanctimonious opinions, that you come across as a 'good fella', but you don't. Your conduct gives the lie to that! In all my career, I have never treated [or been party to the treatment of] anyone the way in which you treated me. Indeed, as I have told you, your actions fell very short of the code of conduct set out by your professional institute. [I say this as someone who had considerable experience in what is now known as human resources and industrial relations, which included appearing before the CAC, Industrial Tribunals, the Certification Officer and the EAT.]
If you were wise, you'd keep on the right side of me. One day, you might be fortunate enough to be prominent in the public's consciousness - in the context of elections perhaps? If you continue to rub me up in the wrong way, I'll increasingly see it as my public duty to ensure your behaviour is made known as widely as possible.
My advice to you, as the would-be leader of a political party, is to contain such opinions. Otherwise, by association, you convey the image of the FEP being a nasty party. In other words, your cure might well be seen as being worse than England's current condition!
______________________________