Best Of

Fair to say this dude is not OVER-optimistic about the Iran War sequelae

"Risible - and frighteningly woolly thinking for a Hudson Institute scholar. Repeat after me: the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is NOT the deterrent. The strategic aim of Iran is to stop the flow of oil through it in order to cause pain. Closure is just ONE means of doing so. THE REAL DETERRENT is the destruction of Gulf oil and gas infrastructure so that hydrocarbons do not reach the global economy IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THE STRAIT IS OPEN OR NOT.

"If Iran pushes that button in response to some dumb Trump-Bibi escalation, we can expect GLOBAL depression. This in turn means mass starvation in the Third World, which in turn leads to a worldwide equivalent of the Arab Spring. In the developed world, ex-the, Russia and maybe China, it means mass unemployment, travel restrictions, mandatory WFH, and the victory for far more extreme versions of populism in Europe. It means command economies. It means aggressive, militaristic efforts to secure important national resources, and war when such efforts are disputed. It means the forced rewiring of the entire postwar civilisation. It is the final conflagration of the Fourth Turning. It is the violent sweeping away of the existing excess elites (per
@Peter_Turchin)."

https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/2035669964326158811?s=20

"A final conflagration of the Fourth Turning and the violent sweeping away of the existing excess elites"

Is this a good or a bad thing?

I've no idea!

What troubles me is that this guy is relatively sensible, IIRC. Not normally given to hysterics. Angry but not sensationalist

Also there are several people talking this way. That we are heading into the most tremendous emergency, worldwide

I find it hard to belive. But I fear that, despite everything, I may have some Normalcy Bias going on

It's very worrying and I am worried. About 2 things. Economic and financial collapse. A nuclear war.

Apart from that, all cool here.

Yep, that's roughly where I am. Still, tomorrow I'm going to Whitstable, so it's swings and roundabouts

In the late 19th century, Han Chinese settlers on Taiwan would EAT the locals, as they thought it would confer strength - eating certain desirable parts of these brave warrior tribesmen. They also boiled the meat down to make a soup, that supposedly prevented malaria

It's good that those sort of practices have gone out of fashion.

What amazes me is how this fact is barely known. I only found out coz I was in Taiwan and I did a lot of deep reading. Then discovered this

If it was an atrocity committed by western imperialists it would be in every single history book and endlessly cited as an example of hideous colonialist depravity

In China? Meh. TThey shrug

More sinned against than sinning, China, in the grand sweep of things over recorded time. But, yes. they've had their moments.

This is highly disoutable. If you look at Chinese imperialist atrocities over 3000 years, it's a long and extraordinary list, much of it barely known

eg Ever heard of this? Me neither, til very recently

"The Dzungar genocide (Chinese: 準噶爾滅族; pinyin: Zhǔngáěr mièzú) was the mass extermination of the Dzungar people, a confederation of Oirat Mongol tribes, by the Qing dynasty.[3]

The Dzungar Khanate was a confederation of several Tibetan Buddhist Oirat Mongol tribes that emerged in the early 17th century, and the last great nomadic empire in Asia. Some scholars estimate that about 80% of the Dzungar population, or around 500,000 to 800,000 people, were killed by a combination of warfare and disease during or after the Qing conquest in 1755–1757.[2][5] After wiping out the native population of Dzungaria, the Qing government then resettled Han, Hui, Uyghur, Salar and Sibe people on state farms in Dzungaria, along with Manchu Bannermen to repopulate the area."

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

I am a great admirer of China's magnificently ancient and storied civilisation. Also, steamed clams in rice wine, mm

However, "more sinned against that sinning"?? A lot of China's neighbours - some now absorbed into China - would disagree

I wonder who the people are who are buying Keir Starmer toby jugs? Apparently he is outselling Sir Winston and Boris.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp385808jk2o

"Sir Keir Starmer may have had a tough year in office, but in one key measure he is top of the shop: the Toby Jug in his likeness outsold all other prime ministers in 2025. The Houses of Parliament gift shop sells 11cm-tall jugs of the last 22 prime ministers, from Conservative Andrew Bonar Law onwards. They cost £35 each.

"The sales figures give an insight into the enduring popularity of some politicians over others. In 2025, the Starmer jug sold most, at 116, including 32 to his colleagues in parliament and further 84 online. Boris Johnson came second selling 48, Winston Churchill 46 and Margaret Thatcher 46."

Poor old Sir Alec Douglas Home has the wooden spoon. That said, the jug doesn't really do him justice. Otherwise I might have got one.

Have a browse here: https://www.shop.parliament.uk/collections/prime-minister-toby-jugs

From your link (and while TSE is away):-

Brown beats Cameron, in a reversal of the 2010 general election.

Gimson added: "It tells us that Cameron, though an astonishingly skillful politician, never formed an emotional connection with the British people, and people want to buy things which actually move them.

"And he didn't move people, he had many other admirable qualities, but connecting with the wider public, hopeless."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp385808jk2o

To be fair, Cameron never showed much interest in that section of the wider public not schooled at Eton.

Badenoch made a big mistake supporting the war. It’s not fatal but it shows she still doesn’t really understand the pool she is supposed to be swimming in.

I get the kneejerk "support America" notion. Ordinarily that would have been the way forward for a Conservative leader.

But Gilead isn't America. It used to be, but isn't. And backing the paedo king is not a long term strategy...

I don't get it, and it shouldn't be the reflexive action for a conservative leader, regardless of who is running the US. As a matter of fact, ruinous foreign conflicts that cause chaos and have no plausible off-ramp are not a unique feature of Trump's US - they are the norm for that country.

However, the attention is now going to switch to the domestic impact of the war, and here the Tories are on far safer ground, because they are on the record opposing loony Net Zero policies and supporting drilling the North Sea. Unless Sir Useless does another very big u-turn here, it is going to get very messy for him.

Hang on, the "loony net zero policies" are Tory policies. Leader after leader after leader. On the day Liz Truss blew up her government it was an opposition debate on Fracking and the SofS stood there are the dispatch lauding their policies on net zero and renewables.

So they're not "loony net zero". They are the established and consensual policies of both parties.

Also worth bearing in mind that although the true loon Ed Miliband has accelerated the retreat from the North Sea, it was the Tories who started this madness with their open ended windfall tax madness.

Indeed on a wider front this is Badenoch's problem. So many of the Labour policies she is now deriding and opposing were initially introduced by the Tories including when she was in Cabinet.

And the electorate rejected them. So you come back with a different offer.

It's not really a problem for Kemi. She wasn't running the previous Tory Government, and she wasn't fronting any of the Net Zero bits. Since becoming leader, she has been clear and on the record in opposing the current Net Zero plans, and wanting to drill in the North Sea. The Government's energy policy is in tatters, and this will be a feeding frenzy. Sir will find it very difficult to move Milliband on, but the longer he takes the worse it will be.

Fair to say this dude is not OVER-optimistic about the Iran War sequelae

"Risible - and frighteningly woolly thinking for a Hudson Institute scholar. Repeat after me: the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is NOT the deterrent. The strategic aim of Iran is to stop the flow of oil through it in order to cause pain. Closure is just ONE means of doing so. THE REAL DETERRENT is the destruction of Gulf oil and gas infrastructure so that hydrocarbons do not reach the global economy IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THE STRAIT IS OPEN OR NOT.

"If Iran pushes that button in response to some dumb Trump-Bibi escalation, we can expect GLOBAL depression. This in turn means mass starvation in the Third World, which in turn leads to a worldwide equivalent of the Arab Spring. In the developed world, ex-the, Russia and maybe China, it means mass unemployment, travel restrictions, mandatory WFH, and the victory for far more extreme versions of populism in Europe. It means command economies. It means aggressive, militaristic efforts to secure important national resources, and war when such efforts are disputed. It means the forced rewiring of the entire postwar civilisation. It is the final conflagration of the Fourth Turning. It is the violent sweeping away of the existing excess elites (per
@Peter_Turchin)."

https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/2035669964326158811?s=20

And that’s the good news

Fair to say this dude is not OVER-optimistic about the Iran War sequelae

"Risible - and frighteningly woolly thinking for a Hudson Institute scholar. Repeat after me: the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is NOT the deterrent. The strategic aim of Iran is to stop the flow of oil through it in order to cause pain. Closure is just ONE means of doing so. THE REAL DETERRENT is the destruction of Gulf oil and gas infrastructure so that hydrocarbons do not reach the global economy IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THE STRAIT IS OPEN OR NOT.

"If Iran pushes that button in response to some dumb Trump-Bibi escalation, we can expect GLOBAL depression. This in turn means mass starvation in the Third World, which in turn leads to a worldwide equivalent of the Arab Spring. In the developed world, ex-the, Russia and maybe China, it means mass unemployment, travel restrictions, mandatory WFH, and the victory for far more extreme versions of populism in Europe. It means command economies. It means aggressive, militaristic efforts to secure important national resources, and war when such efforts are disputed. It means the forced rewiring of the entire postwar civilisation. It is the final conflagration of the Fourth Turning. It is the violent sweeping away of the existing excess elites (per
@Peter_Turchin)."

https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/2035669964326158811?s=20

The Scouts charitable wording evolved over time to the young people of today.

From when it was founded it was "... development of boys ..." despite girls being excluded from a few years after its founding (they originally accepted girls until the Guides was founded).

From 1976 they started to accept girls, but the phrasing was still "... development of boys ..." despite accepting girls too.

It was only from 1991, 15 years after they started accepting girls, that the wording was changed to young people.

And in 1991 - no-one would give a damn, trying to change GG's objectives now - big row.

So its still their choice.

It was the Scouts choice to start accepting girls.
It was the Scouts choice to change their wording.

It is the Guides choice not to accept boys.
It is the Guides choice not to change the wording.

You're right they may not want a big row. That's public opinion, not law, though.

Not just a row. There is different motivation for girls needing a single-sex space and boys not.

And guiding provided that - but someone with a lot of money decided to make things awkward for guiding and that's triggered off a set of events that will (eventually) result in either Guiding closing down or guiding welcoming boys...

There is literally no other outcome from the WI / Guiding court cases as neither have the money to fight the other side in court...