Best Of

I lean in favour of assisted dying, but don't have a strong view.

Of course, one can take one's stance from our moral leaders - any proposed reform that churches oppose, from ending the burning of witches and heretics to legalising divorce, is usually an excellent idea.

Probably right, but an even better bellweather would be the BMA which has consistently opposed every progressive health reform since its inception.

Watch what it says, and support the opposite.

Bellwether - a castrated ram (wether), carrying a bell, so the other sheep can follow even in fog or dark

I can understand the sheep needing to carry a bell so others can follow it, but why do they need to castrate it?

Is it because otherwise it would follow the sexiest ewe rather than leading the pack?

Let’s hope Leon is sleeping it off after his outbursts last night, or this thread will be hard work.

On topic, I’ve not had time to follow closely but surely the major issue with the current bill is nobody has yet written the safeguards into it, saying they will be added later?

*pokes raddled old hungover bear*

I wonder what are the views of Muslims on assisted dying?

I'm surmising, but I think it would be framed around the twin concepts of respect for life, and respect for the sovereignty of God. In general aiui Islam has a stronger concept of 'fate' ("Inshallah") over human agency compared to some other belief systems eg Protestant Christianity. It has a version of what I could characterise as "Calvinist" values.

So a decision to be killed could be seen as an imposition on matters that are not strictly our decision.

I sense that many religious views on the subject emanate from a feeling that life is a gift from whichever god goes with you, and that there is something blasphemous about having agency over the ending of it.

Speaking of Calvinist values, Gordon Brown just on the radio making yet another intervention, this time on assisted dying. Great that he’s found a second career in making moral pronouncements. Perhaps he should go the whole hog, put on a dog collar and let his moral compass guide him back to the manse.

On topic: assisted dying is such an emotive issue that I think we tend to forget that any policy created at scale will have edge cases that are difficult to deal with. Whether or not you are willing to accept the edge cases in an assisted dying policy probably says quite a lot about your personal ethics. In my own case I'm supportive - I think the harm done to the vast majority of people kept alive against their will wins out over the inevitable (but smaller number of) cases of people being pressured into ending their life. But I would find it very hard to legislate this as I've come to realise my own personal ethics are somewhat unusual.

Are international institutions breaking down?

COP29, which started badly with plenty of no shows, is now on the verge of a complete breakdown, and that's on top of the Commonwealth hustle and FUBAR last month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c8jykpdgr08t

If they are, and I fear they may well be, then our descendants are basically fucked. The high point of international cooperation has been and gone, and the future is one of nationalist insanity and environmental destruction.

Darwin got it all wrong. We're regressing.

Evolution is not teleological. Darwin never said it always means "progress or improvement"

Yes, things can zig zag. I know that.

Anyway, as I now keep saying to all and sundry, Left Populism is coming. A radical economic offer for the struggling classes without the tacky xenophobic nostalgia that defines the right wing version.

It won't get funded by billionaires (for obvious reasons) but that won't matter once it gets rolling. I'm in. ✊️🕺

(please refrain from the very tedious "lol" if you choose to reply, which you shouldn't feel you have to)

I have seen you suggest this a couple of times and I don't really get it. Left populism would be an utter disaster for all of us (see Venezuela for an obvious example).

Populism is the enemy of progress, both of the left and right variety, and I think of you as a progressive. What's going on?

I mean a politics that shifts wealth and opportunity in favour of those who are in most need without corruption or financial recklessness or xenophobic obsession with borders and immigration. Nothing like Venezuela.

What do you honestly think will happen if Britain becomes, say, 30% Muslim? Or 40%? Think about it, and be honest

He can't. He wants to live in his bubble.

We couldn't accept that level and nor could any European country.

I agree, but that means necessarily at some point:

European countries bring in nation- or culture-specific restrictions on Islamic migration, which at the moment is entirely unpalatable to a lot of lefties, or indeed lots of people (and I can see why)

And/or

European countries start restricting displays of Islamic religion as a deterrent. Minarets, burqas, etc. We already see that in France and Switzerland

And/or

European countries start "voluntary deportation" of migrants. Already happening in Sweden

I predict this will all get a lot worse before it gets better

I think restricting and revoking visas and residency for people who don't align to our cultural values is necessary. It's going to upset people but we're allowing the viper into the nest because people are scared to say that vipers aren't good for nests.

Again, to repeat what I have posted many times in the past, we should be looking to Norway for our example here. 300 hours of compulsory language and culture lessons and immigrants don't get to choose where the live. They are assigned a county where they have to settle to avoid the creation of ghettos. It works.

Does it? Even Norway has serious problems. Probably only Denmark is seriously attempting - with success - to address this. Hence the re-election of their social democrat government, which is hard right - to an eye-watering degree by UK standards - on migration, culture, and asylum

Norway has serious problems with right wing biker gangs buring down churches. They don't have any real issues with immigrant populations - certainly nothing to copare with most other European countries.

If you remember this is why I was so convinced - along with you - that the 2011 attacks would turn out to be a right wing nutter rather than a muslim attack.

Norway is mercifully free of terror attacks, and of course Breivik was the worst by far

However of the 13 attacks since the year 2000, 8 or 9 appear to be Muslim/Islamist - ie the majority

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Norway

"of the 13 attacks since the year 2000"

Wow. Those guys have *really* serious problems.

BTW; how many deaths were there in these 13 attacks, just to put things in context for us.

Please, take your time.

Suggesting muslims are not over represented in terror/terrorist attacks would be very brave of you.

I'm not saying that at all. My point is simply that @Richard_Tyndall is spot on that Norway has done a genuinely excellent job of integrating people.

@Leon disagrees based upon the fact that - over a quarter century - there have been half a dozen terrorist incidents in Norway that are attributable to Muslims, of which only one resulted in fatalities (when two people died).

Now, obviously the ideal scenario is zero. But one fatal terrorist incident over 24 years is statistical noise. It is as close to zero as makes no difference.

Hence, I agree with @Richard_Tyndall's point that Norway *has* done a good job of integrating minorities, and especially Muslims.

I'm in Norway and very much enjoying the high levels of trust there are here, such as almost no ticket barriers for anything. People are trusted to have paid for tickets for transport. I hope not too many people are taking advantage of it, particularly tourists.

In a discussion that generated a lot more heat than light last night, the combined analysis of Norway by Richard, Robert and Andy is really useful.

I'm slowly building up to a header about the role of trust in politics; @Andy_JS I couldn't agree more about the feeling of trust in Norway and how big an impact it has on the public realm.

As I pointed out on the last thread Germany largely has a trust system for public transport, but afaics trust in politics is breaking down there in the same way as in most western countries. If trust is as deeply embedded in Norway as suggested it must be truly exceptional, and worth examining.

Slightly off topic, you are right about German public transport. I was travelling around last month with a Deutschlandticket for I think 8 days, using public transport every day, and regional trains most days, and I recall only having to show my ticket once.On Intercity trains they asked though.

This is in contrast to NL which has an entry/exit system and Austria where I was asked to show my ticket on every journey.

Is the strong German sense of social conformity engaged?

I'm thinking of the reactions that are sometimes received to crossing the road in the wrong place.

The UK perception often seems to be "if nobody enforces the rules on me I am entitled to break them".

Or, as James May put it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3EBs7sCOzo