Is there anyone on here who doesn't have left wing views

[Ziggy]

So I caught the “Mandela Effect”…..Nelson you utter b*****d.

Strange, but there you go.

Funny in a way. My work involves listening very closely and intently for quite long periods of time, in 1-2 hour stretches. No it’s not boring, far from it.

 

[Scrote]

No, the Mandela effect is people remembering things differently to what actually happened - I.e a false memory - that can either be something happening completely differently or just being a change to what actually got said or what something was called.

There are countless examples of that happening, and in each case the thing happened, just differently - Mandela was in jail but didn't die, Kirk said many ways to get beamed up but never said beam me up, Scotty, many people say Snow White says mirror mirror on the wall but she says magic mirror etc

Ziggys exact quote was

"I distinctly remember this because that answer, together with the look on her face, was very menacing and filled with hatred. Not seen that before or since. So I thought I would look it up and check the YouTube of the exchange. It’s not there…but the most sinister thing is it doesn’t appear in Hansard according to an historian who went looking too, although a lot of other people seem to remember the exact words said."

That's multiple people remembering something that she didn't say. Yes, the exchange happened between May and corbyn, but look at that quote above; especially this bit;

"with the look on her face, was very menacing and filled with hatred. Not seen that before or since."

Ziggy, like the others, is sure she said that but also sure about this look of menacing hatred. You've just posted the video and sure enough at 7 & a half minutes in, she says something different (but similar, same with all the other Mandela examples), but not only that I don't think she has menace or hatred in her face, it's just standard PMQ stuff, and despite being a full old hag of a witch, she is even holding back a smile as she said it

It's completely different to how it has been remembered, unless you're the most die hard labour supporter I suppose. It's certainly an interpretation, anyway and you could say the same about most PMQ. But either way, multiple people have remembered this being said differently

When she finishes the sentence and looks down it appears, just briefly, as if she's snarling.

It was then reported on as such, which is why people remember that aspect.

Multiple people have remembered that something that did happen, happened. They've just forgotten the exact detail.

The historian that did his search didn't do it from memory of the event. He had heard the reports of the event and searched for what he thought had been said based on the reporting of it. At no point is there a mass-misremembering. There's one bloke searching for something he'd heard about and then declaring that it doesn't exist. Other people then jump onboard to say they all remember it happening - which it did. No-one else (other than me, it seems) bothered to actually check through Hansard etc. and dig up the actual quote.

It isn't different to how it was remembered. It's different to how it was reported.

The reason I was able to find it is because I saw the original and knew the quote was wrong.

 

[Ziggy]

So I caught the “Mandela Effect”…..Nelson you utter b*****d.

Strange, but there you go.

Funny in a way. My work involves listening very closely and intently for quite long periods of time, in 1-2 hour stretches. No it’s not boring, far from it.

Just checked with Hansard.
“ Interjections are reported only if the member speaking replies to them or remarks on them during the course of his or her speech”

Was it an interjection I wonder. Doesn’t matter anyway.

 

[grumpyoldgit]

Yes 100% because that is still a vote

Surely the OP be happy with such a choice? It would help to engage more people in the democratic process.

 

[ThatFragranceGuy]

Just checked with Hansard.
“ Interjections are reported only if the member speaking replies to them or remarks on them during the course of his or her speech”

Was it an interjection I wonder. Doesn’t matter anyway.

It's not an interjection, it's in the video above unless you're saying it's something else. Honestly not seeing any snarling on that clip, however. Just seems like a standard PMQ exchange where they tell each other how rubbish they are.

When she finishes the sentence and looks down it appears, just briefly, as if she's snarling.

It was then reported on as such, which is why people remember that aspect.

Multiple people have remembered that something that did happen, happened. They've just forgotten the exact detail.

at no point is there a mass-misremembering. There's one bloke searching for something he'd heard about and then declaring that it doesn't exist. Other people then jump onboard to say they all remember it happening - which it did.

It isn't different to how it was remembered. It's different to how it was reported.

These were the comments on his blog. So we've got 4 people on a historians blog, and a bloke on fmttm adamant that they saw it, not that they saw it reported but that they remember it happening, so safe to say if 4 people replied to something as niche as a historians Wordpress blog, and someone from fmttm had the same experience, more will have the same recollection.

I know it’s ‘late in the day’ in the day to add comment on this, but I remember May saying to Corbyn “We will never let you win” in PMQs. I’m not convinced by the above claim that this is about Fake News. Many remember seeing this. If it doesn’t appear in Hansard, the whole subject becomres more sinister, not less so.

Even later in the day, I recall it too. Given how the Zionist lobby and the Labour right have ‘destroyed’ Jeremy Corbyn. She was speaking the truth, frightening.

I believe it was “we will never let you win”, I have a very strong memory of her saying it, but there seems no record of it and I have searched a number of times for the evidence. I don’t see the fact that there is no evidence of it as meaning it didn’t happen, but something that perhaps reflects the sinister nature of the slip, evidence of it has been erased.

I watched her say it.

 

[r00fie1]

Being robbed by the rich to give to the rich
?

 

[Easterside_Red]

View attachment 64566

Being robbed by the rich to give to the rich
?

Ask Mick if he'll join us on the anti-Brexit march will you?

 

[Aet290204]

 

[Manhead]

I've no interest in politics and don't vote myself personally but looking at the general concensus on here it seems almost entirely left wing based - which seems the opposite of the views of most of the UK population who've generally been more centre right over the years, hence the conservative party being in power more often than not

The UK as a whole generally votes towards the left. The system we operate isn’t representative of that.

What utter b***ks. That's like Woody saying the league table was wrong.

 

[Jedi boro]

What utter b***ks. That's like Woody saying the league table was wrong.

I couldn’t believe it either

 

[festa5]

What utter b***ks. That's like Woody saying the league table was wrong.

I think the point is the left vote is split between more parties. Hence the right are more likely to get into power due to FPTP.

Now I suppose you could argue that Lib Dems aren't left leaning economically (although they're not right wing either), but they are on most social issues.

So at the last election. Which, don't forget, was a "landslide victory" for the right and a "strong mandate" from the people. The main right wing parties had a vote share of 45.6%

The left leaning parties had a vote share of 50.3%

(obviously you then have independents etc so those figures might move up a bit on either side, but the fact remains over 50% did not want a right wing government).

 

[BoroMart]

What utter b***ks. That's like Woody saying the league table was wrong.

People like to riff on this woody quote, but everyone forgets that he was right, the table was lying, because by the end of the season we were not relegated

 

[Cress]

Daniel Forero
Since 2020, the richest 1 percent has captured nearly two-thirds of all new wealth globally — almost twice as much money as the rest of the world’s population. At the beginning of last year, it was estimated that 10 billionaire men possessed six times as much wealth as the poorest three billion people on Earth. In the United States, the richest 10 percent of households own more than 70 percent of the country’s assets.

Such statistics are appalling. They have also become familiar. Since it was catapulted onto the national stage more than a decade ago by Occupy Wall Street, “inequality” has been a frequent topic of conversation in American political life. It helped animate Bernie Sanders’s influential campaigns, reshaped academic scholarship, shifted public policy, and continues to galvanize protest. And yet, however important focusing on the inequality crisis has been, it has also proven insufficient.

 

[Rofesleg]

Not voting is not not abstaining though as no such vote is recorded

It’s not participating in a democratic process

If you really want to abstain spoil your ballot as that way at least your vote or non vote is recorded.

Personally I’d make voting compulsory but include the option to record a non vote.

Although I suppose the % turnout records the apathy or otherwise of the voters. Which can be a useful stat as well.

 

[Scrote]

It's not an interjection, it's in the video above unless you're saying it's something else. Honestly not seeing any snarling on that clip, however. Just seems like a standard PMQ exchange where they tell each other how rubbish they are.


These were the comments on his blog. So we've got 4 people on a historians blog, and a bloke on fmttm adamant that they saw it, not that they saw it reported but that they remember it happening, so safe to say if 4 people replied to something as niche as a historians Wordpress blog, and someone from fmttm had the same experience, more will have the same recollection.

But the four in the comments are all responding to the prompt within the blog. Two explicitly state that they remember it as a different phrase. It isn't the same as people remembering an event that never happened (e.g. Mandela dying in prison).

The fact that Ziggy has almost matched the incorrect quote from the blog also leads to the conclusion that that form of words originated from the blog (or the place the blogging historian found reference to the incident), not from the actual PMQs.

I first came across those words from that blog on twitter in December, 2021. The blog suggests the altercation happened 'a few days ago' but the PMQs linked is from almost a year prior (in September, 2016) and was something I remembered from the time but I wouldn't have remembered the exact phrasing some five years later. I just knew roughly what I was looking for - the blogger didn't, as he hadn't seen it. However, his form of wording was being passed around Twitter in 2021.

All fo that leads me to believe that the reports about the incident (in e.g. The Canary) made more of it than there actually was and that it was these reports that people mis-remembered. It's a much simpler, Occam's Razor-esque, explanation.

 

[Jedi boro]

Although I suppose the % turnout records the apathy or otherwise of the voters. Which can be a useful stat as well.

It is but it doesn’t show the abstaining from the apathetic.

 

[Johnny Vincents Motorbike]

i believe its obvious from the responses that there are plenty of them who dont have a left wing political view.

despite where they may decide themselves they are on the political spectrum.

 

[Ziggy]

But the four in the comments are all responding to the prompt within the blog.

Not me, Scrote. I only saw the blog for the first time today when I was searching for verification of what she said online. Good fun tho’

 

[Rofesleg]

It is but it doesn’t show the abstaining from the apathetic.

Abstaining in a GE just means not voting at all doesn't it?
Different to spoiling.
And different to abstaining in a parliamentary vote or a local council vote. In both those cases abstentions are specifically declared and counted.

 

[Scrote]

Not me, Scrote. I only saw the blog for the first time today when I was searching for verification of what she said online. Good fun tho’

I find it fascinating. The fact you used the form of words that obviously originated either from the blog or from the source used by the blog makes it less likely (to me) that this is some form of Mandela Effect and far more likely that people remembered the incident but not the detail. The false form of words then became dominant as people searched for it and it was spread around the web.

It's more of a meme effect, if anything.