This is such a bad take. Two things can be true at the same time: 1) the vandalism at Policy Exchange's offices is unacceptable (and utterly idiotic); & 2) it is perfectly legitimate to ask for transparency about who funds a reactionary think tank with significant influence over UK politics
not sure if "two sidesing" this is a good idea Paolo. they are a pretty extreme r/w group.
What am I 'two sidesing'? I don't understand the expression/what you mean?
I may have misread your post. never mind. two sidesing means looking at both sides of the argument. policy exchange are a pretty hardcore r/w think tank. "shut the system" - who issued a statement claiming responsibility for the red paint demonstration - are an anti genocide protest group.
I was in england last week and couldn't believe some in the media & politicians were "two sidesing" the idea of accepting money from the taliban to deport Afghans, who likely helped the british army recently, fleeing their terror, back to Afganistan.
Nobody said you don’t have a right to ask.
The point is, you should also be obliged to answer.
Following his logic, all MPs would be anonymous to protect them from attack. Indeed he cites the killing of MPs as justification.
If you google for Policy Exchange and Brexit you will find a litany of pro Brexit lies. They are at the intellectual heart of the radicalisation of British politics, a radicalisation that has now come back to haunt them too.
Famously there weren’t any entitled Trot thugs who thought their moral superiority gave them a right to intimidate others before the EU referendum.
So the behaviour of „Trot thugs“ is justification for a think tank to spread lies and attack migrants in this country?
You mean Thomas Mair?
Below is an example of how policy exchange has attacked millions of EU migrants like me of not making a commitment to the UK. It does not make vandalism right but explains why empathy for them may be limited. @benansell.bsky.social @wallaceme.bsky.social
You've heard of motivated reasoning. Welcome to motivated takery.
Say more? I think I'm missing something here
And if 2 is not met (transparency) they should not be used by any major broadcast medium or government department.
Yes, the people must know their place.
Yes
It was completely acceptable. Just people expressing their legitimate concerns