Best Of

Liverpool fans boo the national anthem then the crowd prevent the full minute silence for Jota

What have we become as a nation

https://x.com/BBCSport/status/1954547342440649136?t=30KveTdfBh6O3sRk7hK1Pw&s=19

I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.

Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,

Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?

Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.

Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16361170

To his credit Michael Heseltine refused to countenance managed decline for Liverpool & has been, I think, proven right in the long term.

To her credit, so did Thatcher.

"She was urged" doesn't mean "she decided".

She was quite good at figuring out when the “experts” were being fuckwits.

In the aftermath of the Brighton Bombing, they advocated all kinds of idiocy. Most of which would have made things 1000x worse - reintroduction of internment?!!. Thatcher, with the dust on her from the bombing, initiated the twin track policy. Track one - peace process, Track Two - infiltrate and destroy the paramilitaries from within. Which culminated in double agents in the PIRA killing off those opposed to the peace process.

On the flip side, she went against her personal instincts to go with the highly effective socio-medical campaign against AIDS - because the medical advice was coherent and cogent.

This is why she was such a brilliant PM.

She's possibly the most intelligent one we've ever had.

I would quibble slightly.

Harold Wilson, one of the youngest Oxford dons of the century at the age of 21, a lecturer in Economic History at New College from 1937, and a research fellow at University College, was probably more intelligent academically.

But he had terrible judgement, and consigned Britain to managed decline.

Mrs Thatcher had a good, upper-second class mind. But great judgement, self-confidence and perseverance, so the country flourished.

Judgement and intelligence are no more than loosely associated, as Noam Chomsky and all the rest of the Commie intelligensia show all the time.

A smallish country colonising a third of the planet consigns itself thereafter to (relative) decline. So if his contribution was the 'managed' bit then that's a plus.

But you're correct on the main point. Wilson was our cleverest PM. A brain with a pipe, basically.

Wilson was an incredibly shrewd politician. And the poster accusing Wilson of managing decline in the same post as eulogising Thatcher.

Thather's USP was managed decline, see the destruction of manufacturing, the replacement of primary and tertiary domestic production with that of the Common Market countries and Japan, and the sale of national economic treasures to foreign asset strippers.

Liverpool fans boo the national anthem then the crowd prevent the full minute silence for Jota

What have we become as a nation

https://x.com/BBCSport/status/1954547342440649136?t=30KveTdfBh6O3sRk7hK1Pw&s=19

I don't know how long you've been following football for but Liverpool have booed the national anthem since the eighties at least after the rest of the country, led by the Tories, left them to out to dry.

Seriously, you spend so much time clutching your pearls I'm amazed your fingers have enough strength left to type,

Given lots of the country suffered from de-industrialisation, why do you think it is only Liverpool that take this view?

Because of this, I don't think anything has emerged about similar being said about other areas.

Margaret Thatcher was secretly urged to consider abandoning Liverpool to a fate of "managed decline" after the Toxteth riots in 1981, official papers reveal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16361170

To his credit Michael Heseltine refused to countenance managed decline for Liverpool & has been, I think, proven right in the long term.

To her credit, so did Thatcher.

"She was urged" doesn't mean "she decided".

She was quite good at figuring out when the “experts” were being fuckwits.

In the aftermath of the Brighton Bombing, they advocated all kinds of idiocy. Most of which would have made things 1000x worse - reintroduction of internment?!!. Thatcher, with the dust on her from the bombing, initiated the twin track policy. Track one - peace process, Track Two - infiltrate and destroy the paramilitaries from within. Which culminated in double agents in the PIRA killing off those opposed to the peace process.

On the flip side, she went against her personal instincts to go with the highly effective socio-medical campaign against AIDS - because the medical advice was coherent and cogent.

This is why she was such a brilliant PM.

She's possibly the most intelligent one we've ever had.

I would quibble slightly.

Harold Wilson, one of the youngest Oxford dons of the century at the age of 21, a lecturer in Economic History at New College from 1937, and a research fellow at University College, was probably more intelligent academically.

But he had terrible judgement, and consigned Britain to managed decline.

Mrs Thatcher had a good, upper-second class mind. But great judgement, self-confidence and perseverance, so the country flourished.

Judgement and intelligence are no more than loosely associated, as Noam Chomsky and all the rest of the Commie intelligensia show all the time.

A smallish country colonising a third of the planet consigns itself thereafter to (relative) decline. So if his contribution was the 'managed' bit then that's a plus.

But you're correct on the main point. Wilson was our cleverest PM. A brain with a pipe, basically.

Wilson was an incredibly shrewd politician. And the poster accusing Wilson of managing decline in the same post as eulogising Thatcher.

Thather's USP was managed decline, see the destruction of manufacturing, the replacement of primary and tertiary domestic production with that of the Common Market countries and Japan, and the sale of national economic treasures to foreign asset strippers.

Hardly, Thatcher made the City of London into the economic powerhouse of Europe, revived Docklands and ended union domination and took the UK from one of the lowest per capita nations in Europe to one of the highest, plus investment in the NE from the likes of Nissan.

More mines closed under Wilson than Thatcher

Only with the boost of North Sea oil, though. Any fool could do a lot with North Sea oil money.

No sovereign wealth fund, either. Compare and contrast: Norway.

This must now be one of the sunniest and maybe warmest summers on record? And spring was remarkably nice

Not 1976 but very pleasant

On Starmer's watch.

Feels like almost every day is “nice” or “really nice”

Not “nice but a bit fucking hot” like Italy or Spain or indeed Nice

Just highly agreeable. 25C and a few clouds

Anecdatish, but it doesn't feel it. It's nice - today was nice - but the last six weeks have been warm but not that sunny. Not unsunny - just no better than average for the time of year. And after a remarkably sunny Mar-Jun, it feels a bit hohum.
My solar generatiom for May this year was my biggest month ever - better than any June.
And there were very few days' play lost in the T20 Blast, and almost none before midsummer.

But today was a perfect summer's day. Oldest daughter has been to the park to meet friends and indulge in the teen summer pasttime of letting a chocolate bar belt and dipping strawberries in it. Younger two daughters have been off to the Mersey Valley to pick blackberries. The wifeand I did some gardening then relaxed in the afterglow of our exertions with a ginger beer. We are, today, living in an idealised 1950s England.

I've just been off blackberry picking with my daughter.

I then had a swift one, and am now cooking fish fingers for the kids and will shortly put on David Attenborough.

Perfect.

Poor David. I am sure the fish fingers would have been enough.

Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII.
It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.

Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT.
https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865

It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)

The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.

Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans).
Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).

Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.

The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.

As with Ukraine, history has inconvenient facts for anyone seeking one-dimensional heroes and villains, from Putin to each of us. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wartime_collaboration_in_the_Baltic_states for the other side of the story.

Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.

The problem is Nick, I don't believe you.

When Ukraine was invaded (again...) in 2022, you blamed everyone but Russia. We shouldn't 'poke' Russia into invading, Ukrainian Nazi's, etc. Pure victim-blaming and whitewashing of Putin's fascism and imperialism.

I daresay when Russia does invade the Baltics or elewhere, you will be full-on excusing-Russia mode.

Russia invaded the Baltic states three times last century, occupying them for decades after WWII.
It's not exactly surprising they're worried about a repeat.

Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia may become Putin's next target - because of this, the leaders of the Baltic countries criticized any attempts to force Ukraine to cede territory, writes FT.
https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1954123898296975865

It’s been a very long running piece of irredentism that any land that was ever part of the Russian Empire is part of the New Russian Empire (of whatever version)

The USSR had it as policy. Putin has made it the policy of his party.

Russia devastated the Baltics several times in the 20thC (twice playing tag team with the Germans).
Ideologically friendly Balts formed the backbone of the early Bolshevik Red Army, and the Cheka (and later died in Stalin's purges).

Others provided slave labour for various projects between the two world wars, or died in the gulags.

The hatred and distrust of Russia has deep and well grounded foundations.

As with Ukraine, history has inconvenient facts for anyone seeking one-dimensional heroes and villains, from Putin to each of us. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wartime_collaboration_in_the_Baltic_states for the other side of the story.

Rather than rely on history, with nearly all the actors no longer alive, it's best to concentrate on the present. The Baltic States seem all to have large majorities who are happy to be independent, and we should support that, while reserving the right to be critical of treatment of pro-Russian minorities. Personally I doubt if there's a serious threat, because of their NATO membership, which makes them very different from Ukraine, but there's no reason why we shouldn't reinforce the commitment to supporting their independence.

There must be a very real threat if there's any discord in the NATO ranks. Say the sort of thing that'd result if Trump traded most of Ukraine away, but gave himself a little Trump enclave to fill with golf courses, hotels and ladies of his tastes to cash in on the Russian holiday market.

The EU should suggest a deal to Russia whereby they give back all of Ukraine, but get Alaska in return. See how Trump likes that.

On topic: They should distinguish punting (our sort of thing which is brilliant and one of life's essentials) from gambling as in those 'online casinos'. The latter sector is pure poison (it's like drug dealing) and should be where the extra tax is directed. It's a no-brainer. There's no need to link it to the two child benefit cap. That should be assessed on its own merits. In general I really dislike this "raise this thing to pay for that thing" mentality even if it's mainly presentational. It makes big ticket fiscal management sound like running some sweaty spreadsheet in the corner of a struggling factory. "If we skip cleaning on a Wednesday we'll be able to keep Jim on". It's just not like that. The numbers are huge and liquid and all is fungible. Everything funds everything. Or rather it doesn't and the shortfall is borrowed. Hence the power of the bond markets and why Reeves is so boxed in. It's a bummer but there's no point pretending otherwise.

(Part 2/2)

Perhaps one of the most amazing things is that there is little evidence of the ongoing war here. There’s a memorial in the main square (photo to follow), some reinforcements around key public buildings, and the occasional air aid siren. The sirens are many fewer in number and lesser in duration than two years ago, the authorities appear to have much better intelligence now as to the timing and number of incoming threats. We’ve had only I think 4 warnings, most of which cleared in 20 or 30 minutes. Damaged buildings are generally repaired/covered/flattened rather than being left as evidence of the war. I’ve seen a few injured men walk king around, perhaps half a dozen with missing legs, and the men wear their uniforms in public.

There’s lots of Ukranian flags on buildings and houses, much as you’d find in say the US.

I think it’s fair to say that although Ukranian people want the war to be over, they’re not willing to surrender their territory in order for that to be the case. Hopefully the new diplomatic efforts in recent days can at least get everyone talking, although I am still convinced that the two sides are as far apart as ever. I’ve never particularly been a fan of David Lammy, but it does appear that his meeting on the Ukranian situation went well yesterday. I’d be surprised if the meeting between Putin and Trump happens, there isn’t enough common ground to agree to anything except a ceasefire, and the Russian side still has no interest in that.