I'd guess there's a pretty good chance any impressive monument from ancient or even closer to modern times was built by shits, or as part of a society and culture that had shitty elements to it. It isn't pretending it was all benign to not focus on the downsides of that.
Taken to it’s logical end, we should tear down every building and monument because previous generations did all sorts of terrible things.
I personally think - and don’t press me on the logic - that the Nazi regime was uniquely awful and that therefore there’s a decent case for the removal of Nazi symbolism etc, which of course has been done.
But I’m v reluctant about everything else, even the Communist stuff in Eastern Europe, Russia etc.
Re Ancoats & Beswick. I know the area fairly well (I work just over the other side of Gt Ancoats Street) and while the New Islington bit is becoming a bit yuppified, most of Beswick, Miles Platting and Bradford is still very solidly working class.
As I understand it, a lot of the vote here has gone against Labour because of a bullying issue forcing out the previous councillor. There's also the background issue of how badly the refurbishment of Great Ancoats Street has gone (city centre LDs have focused on transport in their campaigning for a while now), and perhaps an underlying discontent with the absolute (unrepresentative) stranglehold Labour councillors have on Manchester, with attendant complacency and sloppiness.
I wouldn't draw any conclusions at all about the national picture from this.
I'd say Great Ancoats Street is looking splendid. A real success story. Granted the works were a right kerfuffle. But which works aren't?
It's not my idea of splendour, though I'd have accepted merely practical.
Well ok, it's not the Champs Elysees, yet. But it's almost unrecognisable from what it was 15 years ago. Importantly, it's lined with active frontages of businesses you might like to frequent. And the interruption of the canal and the space next to it is rather nicely done. I'd say a step up from 'practical' - Trinity Way is 'practical'. Manchester does get some things wrong, but it gets far more right than it does wrong, and it does such a lot, that the frequency of success is gratifyingly high. And I'd put Great Ancoats Street firmly in the 'success' category.
Er, what? It looks boring and in parts hideous on that Google Street View
And I would LOVE to believe you. It would be great to think we are rebuilding our cities better. Any links?
That Streetview is from 18 months ago and a lot has changed since then. Look, it's a dual carriageway. It's part of the Manchester and Salford Inner Ring Road. It's not the Shambles in York. But it looks substantially better than that now. It's moderatly pleasant to walk down - that section which has recently been redone, anyway. It's certainly got life and businesses on it, where it used to be a godforsaken stretch of tamac and a rubbish retail park. It separates Ancoats and the Northern Quarter but doesn't sever them. Where once was a ring road there emerges a neighbourhood.
This is not a 60s demolition of the commercial core of the city to replace with something uglier, but a 2020s demolition of post-inudtrial nothing with a functioning neighbourhood.
You should, when you get the chance, come to Manchester; take a walk around Ancoats, and the Northern Quarter, and Crown Street, and the left bank, and Chapel Street, and NOMA. Regeneration far outranks decay. Not all of it perfect. But Leon, the energy and pace of change: not something I ever thought I'd see in this country outside of London.
Sure, I'd like perfect Georgian cityscapes. But we never had that to start with in Manchester. Ancoats moved straight from dark satanic mills to post-industrial wasteland. And now it is one of the most sought-after areas in the North. It is astonishing.
Fair enough, and Yay if it is true. You are right, I need to see it for myself. And I have heard this from others: Manc is much improved, becoming a proper, handsome European city
I seldom ever go there, the last time was maybe 15-20 years ago, and it was quite depressing then. For some reason my job/life takes me to many other UK cities, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff, Newcastle, Bristol, but not Manchester
However, on my last visit, I DO remember wandering around some of the down-at-heel Victorian districts and thinking: wow, if they ever do this up, it will be spectacular. Glasgow's Victorian quarter, for example, is now quite something
I love Manchester beyond the point of reasonableness, but I'd never describe it as handsome. Unlike e.g. Liverpool, Glasgow or Newcastle, it's never known true grandeur, despite a few genuinely gorgeous buildings.
That said, I do enjoy strolling round NQ and seeing all the knackered old former garment factories, mucky book shops and abandoned slum flats amid the fancy shops and bars. It's a compelling place, full of life. Still one or two proper old boozers as well. And I agree - some of the new development has been good; not all of it though: a lot of big box ugly skyscrapers (the Angel Meadow development is especially crummy).
Incidentally, it's not unusual to see the streets dressed up to look like the US, as it's often used as a substitute for New York in films and TV. Lots of external fire escapes and whatnot.
But Manchester has the HISTORY. It is one of the most important cities in the world, in terms of human development. Cottonopolis, the metropole of the Industrial Revolution
There are a few places on this earth where you can say human civilisation changed, and they are all superbly resonant
The Ice Caves of France (perhaps): the birth of human self awareness
Gobekli Tepe and environs: the end of hunter gathering, the dawn of agriculture: the Fall
Jerusalem (and maybe an honourable mention for Akhetaten): the cradle of monotheism
Florence: the Renaissance
Manchester, down to Coalbrookdale: the Industrial Revolution
Somewhere in California: the dawn of the internet, social media and the smartphone
Coalbrookdale is especially amazing. The ironbridge made me nearly cry. I can get sentimental about epochal history
I can get quite patriotic about this. The world's first industrial city (and Ancoats, despite the gentrification, still retains an astonishing atmosphere of this) and the world's first post-industrial city. Manchester invented both communism (Engels) AND capitalism (aka Manchester liberalism - where else has an equivalent of the Free Trade Hall - a concert hall named after the concept of trading freely?). And also feminism (the suffragettes) and, I think, vegetarianism. No doubt one or two others. And our contribution to popular culture, etc, etc. Admittedly we can go on about all this a bit. My daughter's infant school had a singing club, where 8 6 yearolds put on a song called 'We're proud to come from Greater Manchester', basically listing the conurbation's achievments to music. Quite a feat in itself.
An absolutely haunted place, but in the best way.
Not entirely benign, by any means.
In the worst way.
I am utterly ashamed of the British empire and my nation's part in (mostly) utterly reprehensible deeds around the world, commercialisation and exploitation dressed up in our education system as 'civilisation.'
It's shameful.
I'd rip down every statue of the colonialist, grind them into dust and return every artefact stolen from abroad.
You are seriously confused. We are talking about industrialisation, the Industrial Revolution that began in Staffs and Lancs, not imperialism and colonialism. These are two ENTIRELY different things
Not for me. I loathe both and they are not even remotely different.
The expansion of Victorian Britain around the world went hand in glove with the industrial revolution. As did allegedly benign Christianity with it: the betterment of people abroad by missionary endeavours on the back of colonialsm.
Yuck.
But until you have walked in the moccasins of the 'other' you will never get it.
The logical conclusion of what you're saying is that the world would be a better place if there had never been an industrial revolution.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
I think that is just a sign of Leaver paranoia. If the Tories had voted for a Norway option along with Labour in the meaningful vote then I have absolutely no doubt that that is what we would have got. It would have had an unassailable parliamentary majority. The problem was the Tories' insistence that freedom of movement had to end, which meant they couldn't endorse anything that retained the single market. The big picture is simple. At every point since the referendum the process has been controlled by the Tory party and Leavers (or those who wholeheartedly embraced Leave after the referendum). To blame where we are on anyone else is a laughable attempt to rewrite history. And the fact that - having achieved their desired objective - they feel the need to blame anyone, just tells you what a pack of lies the whole Leave campaign was from the start.
Come off it, in the crucial period between the 2017 and 2019 GEs the Conservatives didn't have a majority. The reason we had gridlock and now have the catastrophe of a Brexit which is not only the hardest possible but incompetently implemented is because Labour, the LibDems and the SNP joined forces with the ERG to wreck every attempt at compromise. That wasn't the only cause, of course - there were others, such as the bewildering choice of voters in 2017 to deny Theresa May a majority and the even more bewildering choice of the Labour Party to choose Corbyn as leader, thus making the party unelectable - but you are the one rewriting history in your denial of the role of the opposition parties in the 2017-2019 period.
Nice try Richard! I’ve seen the SNP blamed for all kinds of unlikely things, but blaming us for the Brexit bùrach must deserve some kind of prize.
The paternity of Brexit is almost entirely Conservative, however even erstwhile Cons start to look shifty (like the current leader) when folk start asking who's the daddy.
Re Ancoats & Beswick. I know the area fairly well (I work just over the other side of Gt Ancoats Street) and while the New Islington bit is becoming a bit yuppified, most of Beswick, Miles Platting and Bradford is still very solidly working class.
As I understand it, a lot of the vote here has gone against Labour because of a bullying issue forcing out the previous councillor. There's also the background issue of how badly the refurbishment of Great Ancoats Street has gone (city centre LDs have focused on transport in their campaigning for a while now), and perhaps an underlying discontent with the absolute (unrepresentative) stranglehold Labour councillors have on Manchester, with attendant complacency and sloppiness.
I wouldn't draw any conclusions at all about the national picture from this.
I'd say Great Ancoats Street is looking splendid. A real success story. Granted the works were a right kerfuffle. But which works aren't?
It's not my idea of splendour, though I'd have accepted merely practical.
Well ok, it's not the Champs Elysees, yet. But it's almost unrecognisable from what it was 15 years ago. Importantly, it's lined with active frontages of businesses you might like to frequent. And the interruption of the canal and the space next to it is rather nicely done. I'd say a step up from 'practical' - Trinity Way is 'practical'. Manchester does get some things wrong, but it gets far more right than it does wrong, and it does such a lot, that the frequency of success is gratifyingly high. And I'd put Great Ancoats Street firmly in the 'success' category.
Er, what? It looks boring and in parts hideous on that Google Street View
And I would LOVE to believe you. It would be great to think we are rebuilding our cities better. Any links?
That Streetview is from 18 months ago and a lot has changed since then. Look, it's a dual carriageway. It's part of the Manchester and Salford Inner Ring Road. It's not the Shambles in York. But it looks substantially better than that now. It's moderatly pleasant to walk down - that section which has recently been redone, anyway. It's certainly got life and businesses on it, where it used to be a godforsaken stretch of tamac and a rubbish retail park. It separates Ancoats and the Northern Quarter but doesn't sever them. Where once was a ring road there emerges a neighbourhood.
This is not a 60s demolition of the commercial core of the city to replace with something uglier, but a 2020s demolition of post-inudtrial nothing with a functioning neighbourhood.
You should, when you get the chance, come to Manchester; take a walk around Ancoats, and the Northern Quarter, and Crown Street, and the left bank, and Chapel Street, and NOMA. Regeneration far outranks decay. Not all of it perfect. But Leon, the energy and pace of change: not something I ever thought I'd see in this country outside of London.
Sure, I'd like perfect Georgian cityscapes. But we never had that to start with in Manchester. Ancoats moved straight from dark satanic mills to post-industrial wasteland. And now it is one of the most sought-after areas in the North. It is astonishing.
Fair enough, and Yay if it is true. You are right, I need to see it for myself. And I have heard this from others: Manc is much improved, becoming a proper, handsome European city
I seldom ever go there, the last time was maybe 15-20 years ago, and it was quite depressing then. For some reason my job/life takes me to many other UK cities, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff, Newcastle, Bristol, but not Manchester
However, on my last visit, I DO remember wandering around some of the down-at-heel Victorian districts and thinking: wow, if they ever do this up, it will be spectacular. Glasgow's Victorian quarter, for example, is now quite something
I love Manchester beyond the point of reasonableness, but I'd never describe it as handsome. Unlike e.g. Liverpool, Glasgow or Newcastle, it's never known true grandeur, despite a few genuinely gorgeous buildings.
That said, I do enjoy strolling round NQ and seeing all the knackered old former garment factories, mucky book shops and abandoned slum flats amid the fancy shops and bars. It's a compelling place, full of life. Still one or two proper old boozers as well. And I agree - some of the new development has been good; not all of it though: a lot of big box ugly skyscrapers (the Angel Meadow development is especially crummy).
Incidentally, it's not unusual to see the streets dressed up to look like the US, as it's often used as a substitute for New York in films and TV. Lots of external fire escapes and whatnot.
But Manchester has the HISTORY. It is one of the most important cities in the world, in terms of human development. Cottonopolis, the metropole of the Industrial Revolution
There are a few places on this earth where you can say human civilisation changed, and they are all superbly resonant
The Ice Caves of France (perhaps): the birth of human self awareness
Gobekli Tepe and environs: the end of hunter gathering, the dawn of agriculture: the Fall
Jerusalem (and maybe an honourable mention for Akhetaten): the cradle of monotheism
Florence: the Renaissance
Manchester, down to Coalbrookdale: the Industrial Revolution
Somewhere in California: the dawn of the internet, social media and the smartphone
Coalbrookdale is especially amazing. The ironbridge made me nearly cry. I can get sentimental about epochal history
Re Ancoats & Beswick. I know the area fairly well (I work just over the other side of Gt Ancoats Street) and while the New Islington bit is becoming a bit yuppified, most of Beswick, Miles Platting and Bradford is still very solidly working class.
As I understand it, a lot of the vote here has gone against Labour because of a bullying issue forcing out the previous councillor. There's also the background issue of how badly the refurbishment of Great Ancoats Street has gone (city centre LDs have focused on transport in their campaigning for a while now), and perhaps an underlying discontent with the absolute (unrepresentative) stranglehold Labour councillors have on Manchester, with attendant complacency and sloppiness.
I wouldn't draw any conclusions at all about the national picture from this.
I'd say Great Ancoats Street is looking splendid. A real success story. Granted the works were a right kerfuffle. But which works aren't?
It's not my idea of splendour, though I'd have accepted merely practical.
Well ok, it's not the Champs Elysees, yet. But it's almost unrecognisable from what it was 15 years ago. Importantly, it's lined with active frontages of businesses you might like to frequent. And the interruption of the canal and the space next to it is rather nicely done. I'd say a step up from 'practical' - Trinity Way is 'practical'. Manchester does get some things wrong, but it gets far more right than it does wrong, and it does such a lot, that the frequency of success is gratifyingly high. And I'd put Great Ancoats Street firmly in the 'success' category.
Er, what? It looks boring and in parts hideous on that Google Street View
And I would LOVE to believe you. It would be great to think we are rebuilding our cities better. Any links?
That Streetview is from 18 months ago and a lot has changed since then. Look, it's a dual carriageway. It's part of the Manchester and Salford Inner Ring Road. It's not the Shambles in York. But it looks substantially better than that now. It's moderatly pleasant to walk down - that section which has recently been redone, anyway. It's certainly got life and businesses on it, where it used to be a godforsaken stretch of tamac and a rubbish retail park. It separates Ancoats and the Northern Quarter but doesn't sever them. Where once was a ring road there emerges a neighbourhood.
This is not a 60s demolition of the commercial core of the city to replace with something uglier, but a 2020s demolition of post-inudtrial nothing with a functioning neighbourhood.
You should, when you get the chance, come to Manchester; take a walk around Ancoats, and the Northern Quarter, and Crown Street, and the left bank, and Chapel Street, and NOMA. Regeneration far outranks decay. Not all of it perfect. But Leon, the energy and pace of change: not something I ever thought I'd see in this country outside of London.
Sure, I'd like perfect Georgian cityscapes. But we never had that to start with in Manchester. Ancoats moved straight from dark satanic mills to post-industrial wasteland. And now it is one of the most sought-after areas in the North. It is astonishing.
Fair enough, and Yay if it is true. You are right, I need to see it for myself. And I have heard this from others: Manc is much improved, becoming a proper, handsome European city
I seldom ever go there, the last time was maybe 15-20 years ago, and it was quite depressing then. For some reason my job/life takes me to many other UK cities, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff, Newcastle, Bristol, but not Manchester
However, on my last visit, I DO remember wandering around some of the down-at-heel Victorian districts and thinking: wow, if they ever do this up, it will be spectacular. Glasgow's Victorian quarter, for example, is now quite something
When I visit our Manchester office I can see the statue of Engels out of the window. Reason enough to pay a visit.
More well known the room where Karl Marx penned 'Workers of the World Unite........"
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
The feeling is that Tory MPs will not send letters on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday.
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Interestingly, the Natural History Museum here just tore down it’s Theodore Roosevelt statue about a week ago.
Replaced by some unsightly temporary construction site boarding.
The problem was not I think Roosevelt, but the fact that he was on horseback, accompanied by a presumably loyal and grateful “negro” and a Native American.
I’m not sure how I feel about it. It was a decent statue, but yes the racial symbolism was not fantastic.
Perhaps the rule should be, if you want to tear down a statue, you should be forced to replace it.
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
The feeling is that Tory MPs will not send letters on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday.
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Equally it's a faff to be in London on a Friday so I would expect the threshold to be triggered on a Monday - Wednesday to ensure everyone is around to vote the following evening.
At the same time if we don't hit the numbers next Monday - Tuesday I don't see it occurring until May unless another big story arrives in the meantime.
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
I think Cummings apparently being silenced with legal issues has slowed things down quite a bit. Before the police investigation there was the anticipation of something new from him every couple of days, to change or accelerate the direction.
Interestingly, the Natural History Museum here just tore down it’s Theodore Roosevelt statue about a week ago.
Replaced by some unsightly temporary construction site boarding.
The problem was not I think Roosevelt, but the fact that he was on horseback, accompanied by a presumably loyal and grateful “negro” and a Native American.
I’m not sure how I feel about it. It was a decent statue, but yes the racial symbolism was not fantastic.
Perhaps the rule should be, if you want to tear down a statue, you should be forced to replace it.
You had me confused for a moment - the American Museum of Natural History in NYC I think, not the South Ken one. I wondered if it was his big game hunting as he did have a famous and huge safari to collect stuff in Africa, but there was rather more wildlife around then, and apparently not anyway.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
Re Ancoats & Beswick. I know the area fairly well (I work just over the other side of Gt Ancoats Street) and while the New Islington bit is becoming a bit yuppified, most of Beswick, Miles Platting and Bradford is still very solidly working class.
As I understand it, a lot of the vote here has gone against Labour because of a bullying issue forcing out the previous councillor. There's also the background issue of how badly the refurbishment of Great Ancoats Street has gone (city centre LDs have focused on transport in their campaigning for a while now), and perhaps an underlying discontent with the absolute (unrepresentative) stranglehold Labour councillors have on Manchester, with attendant complacency and sloppiness.
I wouldn't draw any conclusions at all about the national picture from this.
I'd say Great Ancoats Street is looking splendid. A real success story. Granted the works were a right kerfuffle. But which works aren't?
It's not my idea of splendour, though I'd have accepted merely practical.
Well ok, it's not the Champs Elysees, yet. But it's almost unrecognisable from what it was 15 years ago. Importantly, it's lined with active frontages of businesses you might like to frequent. And the interruption of the canal and the space next to it is rather nicely done. I'd say a step up from 'practical' - Trinity Way is 'practical'. Manchester does get some things wrong, but it gets far more right than it does wrong, and it does such a lot, that the frequency of success is gratifyingly high. And I'd put Great Ancoats Street firmly in the 'success' category.
Er, what? It looks boring and in parts hideous on that Google Street View
And I would LOVE to believe you. It would be great to think we are rebuilding our cities better. Any links?
That Streetview is from 18 months ago and a lot has changed since then. Look, it's a dual carriageway. It's part of the Manchester and Salford Inner Ring Road. It's not the Shambles in York. But it looks substantially better than that now. It's moderatly pleasant to walk down - that section which has recently been redone, anyway. It's certainly got life and businesses on it, where it used to be a godforsaken stretch of tamac and a rubbish retail park. It separates Ancoats and the Northern Quarter but doesn't sever them. Where once was a ring road there emerges a neighbourhood.
This is not a 60s demolition of the commercial core of the city to replace with something uglier, but a 2020s demolition of post-inudtrial nothing with a functioning neighbourhood.
You should, when you get the chance, come to Manchester; take a walk around Ancoats, and the Northern Quarter, and Crown Street, and the left bank, and Chapel Street, and NOMA. Regeneration far outranks decay. Not all of it perfect. But Leon, the energy and pace of change: not something I ever thought I'd see in this country outside of London.
Sure, I'd like perfect Georgian cityscapes. But we never had that to start with in Manchester. Ancoats moved straight from dark satanic mills to post-industrial wasteland. And now it is one of the most sought-after areas in the North. It is astonishing.
Fair enough, and Yay if it is true. You are right, I need to see it for myself. And I have heard this from others: Manc is much improved, becoming a proper, handsome European city
I seldom ever go there, the last time was maybe 15-20 years ago, and it was quite depressing then. For some reason my job/life takes me to many other UK cities, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff, Newcastle, Bristol, but not Manchester
However, on my last visit, I DO remember wandering around some of the down-at-heel Victorian districts and thinking: wow, if they ever do this up, it will be spectacular. Glasgow's Victorian quarter, for example, is now quite something
I love Manchester beyond the point of reasonableness, but I'd never describe it as handsome. Unlike e.g. Liverpool, Glasgow or Newcastle, it's never known true grandeur, despite a few genuinely gorgeous buildings.
That said, I do enjoy strolling round NQ and seeing all the knackered old former garment factories, mucky book shops and abandoned slum flats amid the fancy shops and bars. It's a compelling place, full of life. Still one or two proper old boozers as well. And I agree - some of the new development has been good; not all of it though: a lot of big box ugly skyscrapers (the Angel Meadow development is especially crummy).
Incidentally, it's not unusual to see the streets dressed up to look like the US, as it's often used as a substitute for New York in films and TV. Lots of external fire escapes and whatnot.
But Manchester has the HISTORY. It is one of the most important cities in the world, in terms of human development. Cottonopolis, the metropole of the Industrial Revolution
There are a few places on this earth where you can say human civilisation changed, and they are all superbly resonant
The Ice Caves of France (perhaps): the birth of human self awareness
Gobekli Tepe and environs: the end of hunter gathering, the dawn of agriculture: the Fall
Jerusalem (and maybe an honourable mention for Akhetaten): the cradle of monotheism
Florence: the Renaissance
Manchester, down to Coalbrookdale: the Industrial Revolution
Somewhere in California: the dawn of the internet, social media and the smartphone
Coalbrookdale is especially amazing. The ironbridge made me nearly cry. I can get sentimental about epochal history
I can get quite patriotic about this. The world's first industrial city (and Ancoats, despite the gentrification, still retains an astonishing atmosphere of this) and the world's first post-industrial city. Manchester invented both communism (Engels) AND capitalism (aka Manchester liberalism - where else has an equivalent of the Free Trade Hall - a concert hall named after the concept of trading freely?). And also feminism (the suffragettes) and, I think, vegetarianism. No doubt one or two others. And our contribution to popular culture, etc, etc. Admittedly we can go on about all this a bit. My daughter's infant school had a singing club, where 8 6 yearolds put on a song called 'We're proud to come from Greater Manchester', basically listing the conurbation's achievments to music. Quite a feat in itself.
Don't forget the work of Rutherford and Turing and Kilburn and Williams at the University.
They were part of the song too. It went on for some time... Right off to cook tea. I shall graciously allow the conversation to move on from talking about Manchester. No doubt I will turn up again soon and brashly try to steer it back. It's what we do, I'm afraid...
I thought you were one of those types who refuse to concede that Wigan etc are part of Greater Manchester.
Yes, that's me too! It's complicated. I identify with Cheshire AND with Greater Manchester. And with the wider North West, and the wider North, and England, and Great Britain, and the UK, and the British Isles, and Europe...
And I'd also like permanent and immutable counties that we can agree on yhe borders of for the purposes of quiz questions.
Cheshire and Lancashire have better names, but I certainly don't argue that GM doesn't exist. And local government doesn't have to echo County boundaries.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
It’s batshit. But with a smidgeon of believability.
The best retort was Nabavi’s upthread. Oh, so Scottish taxpayers are also going to pay for English pensions, then?
They're making such a weird point though, the pensions liability of its citizens transferring to the new country seems extremely uncontroversial. It's just one of those "fact of life" inanities. I guess it speaks to their insecurity that they don't think they can win without the English taxpayer underwriting their "independent" nation.
I look at Empire largely with the context of someone who grew up in 80s NZ.
White settlers (often with the connivance of the colonial government) confiscated huge amounts of land from Māori tribes, and Māori culture was largely suppressed, benignly or otherwise, as Pakeha set about creating the Dominion.
Yet, yet.
If one plays the Rawlsian game, there really were few better places to be born - whether Pakeha or Māori - than NZ in the 80s.
Relatively prosperous, largely uncorrupt, mostly egalitarian, and broadly tolerant. Largely because of British constitutional thinking, British rule of law, and British (or Anglican and Presbyterian) sensibilities on what a just society looks like.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance ; let alone half a million dead.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
Yes, for every country like Ireland, with a truly harrowing experience of British rule there are counter-examples like here, Sri Lanka
The argument around their independence - and today is Sri Lankan independence day - is fascinating. Essentially indy for Ceylon was demanded by a small elite, a few very rich posh families. Meanwhile the weary British - distracted by the great unravelling of the Raj - were happy to let it happen. Celyon was a sideshow
Yet lots of thoughtful Sri Lankans said Wait, we have had 150 years of Pax Britannica, if we go indy we will return to brutal infighting.
And that, of course, is exactly what happened. I had no idea how bloody and awful Sri Lanka's modern history has been, until I read that book. The Tamil-Sinhalese war is just one part of it. Endless gruesome massacres, and terror
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
I liked that. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of our colonial heritage, but it's necessary to look at it with a clear eye and not pretend the bad stuff didn't happen.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance.
Personally I find Jimmy Carr unfunny and the joke as written offensive in the extreme.
I look at Empire largely with the context of someone who grew up in 80s NZ.
White settlers (often with the connivance of the colonial government) confiscated huge amounts of land from Māori tribes, and Māori culture was largely suppressed, benignly or otherwise, as Pakeha set about creating the Dominion.
Yet, yet.
If one plays the Rawlsian game, there really were few better places to be born - whether Pakeha or Māori - than NZ in the 80s.
Relatively prosperous, largely uncorrupt, mostly egalitarian, and broadly tolerant. Largely because of British constitutional thinking, British rule of law, and British (or Anglican and Presbyterian) sensibilities on what a just society looks like.
I consider myself blessed to inherit that.
Yup, I always look at it from the context of India. Can anyone really say that India being under some quasi religious and cultural Hindu law would be a good thing? British values are embedded in Indian culture today and that's a good thing for Indian people and for the whole world.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
I watched this back in December and I'm surprised it's taken this long for it to be picked up. Carr did immediately say prior to that joke that it was the beginning of his "career enders" section so he was fully aware of how polarising that joke was.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
I liked that. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of our colonial heritage, but it's necessary to look at it with a clear eye and not pretend the bad stuff didn't happen.
But also not pretend that the good stuff didn't happen.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance.
Personally I find Jimmy Carr unfunny and the joke as written offensive in the extreme.
But free speech…
I'm not sure what I think of the free speech angle on that, one way or the other. But it could definitely also be construed by a lot of people as something akin to incitement as well, to me.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
It's just plain nasty.
A dark joke could be made about the kind of people who, being racist about Gypsies, would agree with such a statement.
But that "joke" isn't about that. It's just plain racism.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
I liked that. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of our colonial heritage, but it's necessary to look at it with a clear eye and not pretend the bad stuff didn't happen.
Indeed, I also don't think it's fair to judge historical events and people by today's standards. Those who spoke out against slavery back then should be lauded as visionary, yet we shouldn't condemn those who did what was considered acceptable at the time. Slavery is wholly evil and I'm happy we recognise that to be true in this country, but suggesting we should apply that to people who lived 300 years ago is a bit mad.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
A fundamentally malign undertaking whose consequences were not all malign - is how I'd put it. This is different to saying "mixed bag" or "it's complicated", both of which I hate to hear (although not as much as I hate to hear that it was our gift to the less civilized parts and peoples of the world, for which they should be grateful, and an integral positive part of our great history and specialness as a nation).
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
Twitter is claiming that the "joke" was part of a much longer riff on what you can and cannot say, and what might get you cancelled, so it must be seen in that context. It is part of a Netflix show called "His Dark Material"
It would be quite the irony if he gets cancelled for a poor joke he made up just to see what gets you cancelled
Out of context (if this exists) it is clearly grotesque
I look at Empire largely with the context of someone who grew up in 80s NZ.
White settlers (often with the connivance of the colonial government) confiscated huge amounts of land from Māori tribes, and Māori culture was largely suppressed, benignly or otherwise, as Pakeha set about creating the Dominion.
Yet, yet.
If one plays the Rawlsian game, there really were few better places to be born - whether Pakeha or Māori - than NZ in the 80s.
Relatively prosperous, largely uncorrupt, mostly egalitarian, and broadly tolerant. Largely because of British constitutional thinking, British rule of law, and British (or Anglican and Presbyterian) sensibilities on what a just society looks like.
I consider myself blessed to inherit that.
Yup, I always look at it from the context of India. Can anyone really say that India being under some quasi religious and cultural Hindu law would be a good thing? British values are embedded in Indian culture today and that's a good thing for Indian people and for the whole world.
I remember being startled when an Indian told me that the English language was seen as... neutral?... in India.
I'd assumed that the colonial thing would have made it a massive issue.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
It's just plain nasty.
A dark joke could be made about the kind of people who, being racist about Gypsies, would agree with such a statement.
But that "joke" isn't about that. It's just plain racism.
Yeah, if thats the full "joke" then he has not crossed the line but obliterated it.
Edit - seen suggestions downthread there is more context, which would make more sense.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
I read recently that the caste system in India dates back to the arrival of conquering Aryan tribesmen, what, 5000 years ago. It's as if the distinction between Spartans and Helots in southern Greece persisted into the modern day and for thousands of years into the future.
WTF? They are raving bonkers. In any case, the time to improve ventilation in schools was a year ago.
There's been some curious missteps of late. This, but also, a demand that all households install interlinked fire alarms at £200+ a pop by the end of last month - been routinely ignored, of course, not least because the supply has dried up. But questions over validity of house insurance. And then, of course, the utter bullsh*t about pensions - though this maybe has a wierd logic in NatLand. What they have in common is they are all risible and to be laughed at. Something which Ms Sturgeon is not appreciative of. Strange, as SNP are usually very well-drilled and red hot on presentation.
Quite surprised that they have run out.
There should be normal stock for sales to a market of 28m households in the country available for relocation.
Are they required to be mains-powered?
The 200 a pop is bollox as well, I replaced one recently for under 30 quid. PLus fact that there is no penalty for not having them installed means it i sno issue at all for anyone unless you are moving house or upgrading property. Unionists just love to whinge, sickening.
TBF they need more than one, and for many they are installed by tradesmen.
£200 is not that far off. £100 for the alarms and £100 for the fitter.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance.
Personally I find Jimmy Carr unfunny and the joke as written offensive in the extreme.
But free speech…
Free speech? No one stopped him saying it. That is what free speech is - he can say what he likes. And he did so.
However, if I was hiring a comedian, I would hire one that made me and my audience laugh, not one that would offend and upset them.
No one has to hire an ar*ehole just because he likes running his mouth ...
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
A fundamentally malign undertaking whose consequences were not all malign - is how I'd put it. This is different to saying "mixed bag" or "it's complicated", both of which I hate to hear (although not as much as I hate to hear that it was our gift to the less civilized parts and peoples of the world, for which they should be grateful, and an integral positive part of our great history and specialness as a nation).
Do you honestly believe that the women of India would be better off without the empire? Living under Hindu religious law and being treated like second class citizens mirroring Islamic countries living under similar religious law?
I look at Empire largely with the context of someone who grew up in 80s NZ.
White settlers (often with the connivance of the colonial government) confiscated huge amounts of land from Māori tribes, and Māori culture was largely suppressed, benignly or otherwise, as Pakeha set about creating the Dominion.
Yet, yet.
If one plays the Rawlsian game, there really were few better places to be born - whether Pakeha or Māori - than NZ in the 80s.
Relatively prosperous, largely uncorrupt, mostly egalitarian, and broadly tolerant. Largely because of British constitutional thinking, British rule of law, and British (or Anglican and Presbyterian) sensibilities on what a just society looks like.
I consider myself blessed to inherit that.
Yup, I always look at it from the context of India. Can anyone really say that India being under some quasi religious and cultural Hindu law would be a good thing? British values are embedded in Indian culture today and that's a good thing for Indian people and for the whole world.
I remember being startled when an Indian told me that the English language was seen as... neutral?... in India.
I'd assumed that the colonial thing would have made it a massive issue.
Latin persisted in such a capacity in the former Roman Empire.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
It's just plain nasty.
A dark joke could be made about the kind of people who, being racist about Gypsies, would agree with such a statement.
But that "joke" isn't about that. It's just plain racism.
Yeah, if thats the full "joke" then he has not crossed the line but obliterated it.
Edit - seen suggestions downthread there is more context, which would make more sense.
I'm not sure context helps much. If he added "actually, some of my best friends are Gypsies...."?
The idea that Indians could not have alternatively found justice and rule of law is unproven at best, especially considering Britain's accentuation of religion and "race" to divide and conquer - one of its legacies to independent India being the idea of a "martial race", after all.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance.
Personally I find Jimmy Carr unfunny and the joke as written offensive in the extreme.
But free speech…
Free speech? No one stopped him saying it. That is what free speech is - he can say what he likes. And he did so.
However, if I was hiring a comedian, I would hire one that made me and my audience laugh, not one that would offend and upset them.
No one has to hire an ar*ehole just because he likes running his mouth ...
I look at Empire largely with the context of someone who grew up in 80s NZ.
White settlers (often with the connivance of the colonial government) confiscated huge amounts of land from Māori tribes, and Māori culture was largely suppressed, benignly or otherwise, as Pakeha set about creating the Dominion.
Yet, yet.
If one plays the Rawlsian game, there really were few better places to be born - whether Pakeha or Māori - than NZ in the 80s.
Relatively prosperous, largely uncorrupt, mostly egalitarian, and broadly tolerant. Largely because of British constitutional thinking, British rule of law, and British (or Anglican and Presbyterian) sensibilities on what a just society looks like.
I consider myself blessed to inherit that.
Yup, I always look at it from the context of India. Can anyone really say that India being under some quasi religious and cultural Hindu law would be a good thing? British values are embedded in Indian culture today and that's a good thing for Indian people and for the whole world.
I remember being startled when an Indian told me that the English language was seen as... neutral?... in India.
I'd assumed that the colonial thing would have made it a massive issue.
Latin persisted in such a capacity in the former Roman Empire.
Still does. I have a textbook of the formal Latin which botanists use to do the primary taxonomic description of new species of plant.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance.
Personally I find Jimmy Carr unfunny and the joke as written offensive in the extreme.
But free speech…
Free speech? No one stopped him saying it. That is what free speech is - he can say what he likes. And he did so.
However, if I was hiring a comedian, I would hire one that made me and my audience laugh, not one that would offend and upset them.
No one has to hire an ar*ehole just because he likes running his mouth ...
Free speech does get conflated with free speech with zero consequences for offending people. Not sure when that started.
There should be no legal consequences for offending people (unless inciting violence), and the safety of the offendee should be protected by the state if they receive threats a la Rushdie et al. But commercial, social or political consequences from offending people are just normal life.
The idea that Indians could not have alternatively found justice and rule of law is unproven at best, especially considering Britain's accentuation of religion and "race" to divide and conquer - one of its legacies to independent India being the idea of a "martial race", after all.
Indeed, and unmartial ones only good for doing the paperwork and trading. (Their opinion. Not mine.)
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance.
Personally I find Jimmy Carr unfunny and the joke as written offensive in the extreme.
But free speech…
Free speech? No one stopped him saying it. That is what free speech is - he can say what he likes. And he did so.
However, if I was hiring a comedian, I would hire one that made me and my audience laugh, not one that would offend and upset them.
No one has to hire an ar*ehole just because he likes running his mouth ...
Sure. If people don’t want to see him or book him that is also their right.
He’s a punch-downer, which is why he’s unfunny. See also David Walliams.
The idea that Indians could not have alternatively found justice and rule of law is unproven at best, especially considering Britain's accentuation of religion and "race" to divide and conquer - one of its legacies to independent India being the idea of a "martial race", after all.
I agree with Max, I know we're horrible racists because, checks notes, our antecedents are from that part of the world.
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
The feeling is that Tory MPs will not send letters on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday.
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Gray gave her update on Monday, which confirmed Bojo broke the ministerial code and is under criminal investigation, drawing a straight line between the cultural failings and the leadership. Swiftly followed by the Savile calamity.
Monday! They had half of Monday, and then all of Tues, Wed and Thurs. What are the useless fuckers waiting for?
Those who attack, or even more bizarrely, are 'ashamed' of, the British empire never seem to get round to telling us what counterfactual they are comparing it with. Presumably not a French, Dutch, or German empire, so I guess they must be dreaming about some fantasy world where the alternative in all the places the British ended up ruling was a cross between a Rousseauesque noble-savage purity and a Swedish social democracy, magically combining democratic self-rule with the advances of the industrial revolution and the values of the European Enlightenment.
The idea that Indians could not have alternatively found justice and rule of law is unproven at best, especially considering Britain's accentuation of religion and "race" to divide and conquer - one of its legacies to independent India being the idea of a "martial race", after all.
You underestimate just how critical religion is in India, especially among the ruling classes/castes. It's also quaint that you believe the British divided Indian people on religious or caste lines.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
Twitter is claiming that the "joke" was part of a much longer riff on what you can and cannot say, and what might get you cancelled, so it must be seen in that context. It is part of a Netflix show called "His Dark Material"
It would be quite the irony if he gets cancelled for a poor joke he made up just to see what gets you cancelled
Out of context (if this exists) it is clearly grotesque
Yes, he surely doesn't just tell that as a standalone joke. It's both offensive *and* pretty agricultural as it stands.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
It's just plain nasty.
A dark joke could be made about the kind of people who, being racist about Gypsies, would agree with such a statement.
But that "joke" isn't about that. It's just plain racism.
Yeah, if thats the full "joke" then he has not crossed the line but obliterated it.
Edit - seen suggestions downthread there is more context, which would make more sense.
I'm not sure context helps much. If he added "actually, some of my best friends are Gypsies...."?
It probably wouldn't help but enough for me to reserve judgment. On its own it doesn't really make any sense for an experienced TV comedian to think it worth saying.
Those who attack, or even more bizarrely, are 'ashamed' of, the British empire never seem to get round to telling us what counterfactual they are comparing it with. Presumably not a French, Dutch, or German empire, so I guess they must be dreaming about some fantasy world where the alternative in all the places the British ended up ruling was a cross between a Rousseauesque noble-savage purity and a Swedish social democracy, magically combining democratic self-rule with the advances of the industrial revolution and the values of the European Enlightenment.
Reader, that wasn't the alternative.
Richard, let me introduce you to Burma and the Gulf States!
The idea that Indians could not have alternatively found justice and rule of law is unproven at best, especially considering Britain's accentuation of religion and "race" to divide and conquer - one of its legacies to independent India being the idea of a "martial race", after all.
I agree with Max, I know we're horrible racists because, checks notes, our antecedents are from that part of the world.
It's fine, I enjoy being told about my own culture by white liberals, what's the term for it? Whitesplaining?
I look at Empire largely with the context of someone who grew up in 80s NZ.
White settlers (often with the connivance of the colonial government) confiscated huge amounts of land from Māori tribes, and Māori culture was largely suppressed, benignly or otherwise, as Pakeha set about creating the Dominion.
Yet, yet.
If one plays the Rawlsian game, there really were few better places to be born - whether Pakeha or Māori - than NZ in the 80s.
Relatively prosperous, largely uncorrupt, mostly egalitarian, and broadly tolerant. Largely because of British constitutional thinking, British rule of law, and British (or Anglican and Presbyterian) sensibilities on what a just society looks like.
I consider myself blessed to inherit that.
Yup, I always look at it from the context of India. Can anyone really say that India being under some quasi religious and cultural Hindu law would be a good thing? British values are embedded in Indian culture today and that's a good thing for Indian people and for the whole world.
I don't think every British legacy to India was bad, allthough I also think many were ; but I'm also not sure personally on that religious aspect. There are some differences in the way modern Islam and hinduism have developed that would probably still continue a difference there in other contexts regardless, I think, too, possibly because of different internal dynamics in the religions.
Those who attack, or even more bizarrely, are 'ashamed' of, the British empire never seem to get round to telling us what counterfactual they are comparing it with. Presumably not a French, Dutch, or German empire, so I guess they must be dreaming about some fantasy world where the alternative in all the places the British ended up ruling was a cross between a Rousseauesque noble-savage purity and a Swedish social democracy, magically combining democratic self-rule with the advances of the industrial revolution and the values of the European Enlightenment.
Reader, that wasn't the alternative.
The alternative to the British might have been Belgium. King Leopold, and Belgium
And if you want to know how that turned out, read this:
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
The feeling is that Tory MPs will not send letters on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday.
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Gray gave her update on Monday, which confirmed Bojo broke the ministerial code and is under criminal investigation, drawing a straight line between the cultural failings and the leadership. Swiftly followed by the Savile calamity.
Monday! They had half of Monday, and then all of Tues, Wed and Thurs. What are the useless fuckers waiting for?
They simply cannot coalesce around a candidate, and if they are not careful it will be too late for their careers
I'd guess there's a pretty good chance any impressive monument from ancient or even closer to modern times was built by shits, or as part of a society and culture that had shitty elements to it. It isn't pretending it was all benign to not focus on the downsides of that.
Taken to it’s logical end, we should tear down every building and monument because previous generations did all sorts of terrible things.
I personally think - and don’t press me on the logic - that the Nazi regime was uniquely awful and that therefore there’s a decent case for the removal of Nazi symbolism etc, which of course has been done.
I was surprised that the podium from which Hitler gave his Nuremberg speeches is still there, in front of the colonnaded backdrop with only the swastika atop missing, blown up by the Americans shortly after the war.
When I dropped by in September, the structure was being used by a fitness group for their exercise class, and while standing looking out at the arena from precisely where Hitler stood, my dog decided it was a good place to drop some poop.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
I read recently that the caste system in India dates back to the arrival of conquering Aryan tribesmen, what, 5000 years ago. It's as if the distinction between Spartans and Helots in southern Greece persisted into the modern day and for thousands of years into the future.
Those who attack, or even more bizarrely, are 'ashamed' of, the British empire never seem to get round to telling us what counterfactual they are comparing it with. Presumably not a French, Dutch, or German empire, so I guess they must be dreaming about some fantasy world where the alternative in all the places the British ended up ruling was a cross between a Rousseauesque noble-savage purity and a Swedish social democracy, magically combining democratic self-rule with the advances of the industrial revolution and the values of the European Enlightenment.
Reader, that wasn't the alternative.
The alternative to the British might have been Belgium. King Leopold, and Belgium
And if you want to know how that turned out, read this:
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
It's just plain nasty.
A dark joke could be made about the kind of people who, being racist about Gypsies, would agree with such a statement.
But that "joke" isn't about that. It's just plain racism.
Yeah, if thats the full "joke" then he has not crossed the line but obliterated it.
Edit - seen suggestions downthread there is more context, which would make more sense.
I'm not sure context helps much. If he added "actually, some of my best friends are Gypsies...."?
It probably wouldn't help but enough for me to reserve judgment. On its own it doesn't really make any sense for an experienced TV comedian to think it worth saying.
You never heard of the Aristocrats joke? There was a good docco about it back in the day. Comedians competing to tell their version of the worlds most offensive joke. Gilbert Gottfried won it for me. Though Cartman’s was also top notch. What is it with everyone getting triggered now? So tedious.
Those who attack, or even more bizarrely, are 'ashamed' of, the British empire never seem to get round to telling us what counterfactual they are comparing it with. Presumably not a French, Dutch, or German empire, so I guess they must be dreaming about some fantasy world where the alternative in all the places the British ended up ruling was a cross between a Rousseauesque noble-savage purity and a Swedish social democracy, magically combining democratic self-rule with the advances of the industrial revolution and the values of the European Enlightenment.
Reader, that wasn't the alternative.
Absolutely agree - and if you look at the other European Empires (yes reader they would have done it where we didn’t) they haven’t exactly left behind a golden legacy.
Arguably the ex British Empire countries have fared better if you compare the whole range - Britain has effectively left the US, Canada, Australia and NZ as positives and the negatives are on a par with anything left behind by France, Spain (look at South America - so much potential and it’s a shitshow). All European nations left behind a mess in Africa and as for Asia we have India and Pakistan at various degrees of success/failure to Singapore and Hong Kong until recently.
So to think that if we hadn’t had an Empire then these countries would be great is balls - they would have been taken over by another European Country - maybe even Belgium which I’m guessing aren’t the ideal colonists……
The idea that Indians could not have alternatively found justice and rule of law is unproven at best, especially considering Britain's accentuation of religion and "race" to divide and conquer - one of its legacies to independent India being the idea of a "martial race", after all.
I agree with Max, I know we're horrible racists because, checks notes, our antecedents are from that part of the world.
Noone called you racists but the case is unproven. Japan Westernised in about a decade of occupation. It didn't take centuries of extraction.
The reason it is funny - and it is, people laughed - is because he shames us for our selective identification of racism.
The joke is not "ho ho, fuck the gypsies"
It's an awkward "ah crap, he's right, why don't I apply the same standard to travellers?!"
It's very dark. He flips our self-righteousness on its head. And, as someone who grew up in a town with a deep loathing of the local travellers, it cuts deep.
Its entirely up to Netflix if it stays up. But I hope they understand the nuance.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance.
Personally I find Jimmy Carr unfunny and the joke as written offensive in the extreme.
But free speech…
Free speech? No one stopped him saying it. That is what free speech is - he can say what he likes. And he did so.
However, if I was hiring a comedian, I would hire one that made me and my audience laugh, not one that would offend and upset them.
No one has to hire an ar*ehole just because he likes running his mouth ...
Sure. If people don’t want to see him or book him that is also their right.
He’s a punch-downer, which is why he’s unfunny. See also David Walliams.
Little Britain was definitely unfunny. As far as I could see, they recycled the same sketches every week.
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
The feeling is that Tory MPs will not send letters on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday.
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Gray gave her update on Monday, which confirmed Bojo broke the ministerial code and is under criminal investigation, drawing a straight line between the cultural failings and the leadership. Swiftly followed by the Savile calamity.
Monday! They had half of Monday, and then all of Tues, Wed and Thurs. What are the useless fuckers waiting for?
To be honest I think they are waiting for the full Gray report and/or the moment Boris Johnson is fined.
Right now if the wins the VOC he will continue for at least the next 12 months, so wait to strike when he's at his most vulnerable.
I don’t know why anyone would object to UK colonial architecture.
Fancy going to Venice and demanding it all be ripped up because some Doge did bad things in Corfu.
Some of the colonial buildings in India are incredible, it's also quite important to remember the brutal regime and those who died building them. Tearing them down and attempting to erase that history is as bad as burning books because they are disagreeable.
All the best buildings here in Colombo are British. Apart from - maybe - a couple of skyscrapers, which are just beginning to show some glam and style
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
The British empire was a weird one, it's one of history's shades of grey, not like French colonialism which was terrible and still causes significant problems today. Lots of people like to boldly say that the empire was evil and it should never have happened, yet I think the world would be a worse place if it hadn't existed. There's no doubt that it was a brutal and sometimes commited atrocities, yet establishing English as the lingua franca, establishing British values across North America, India and other parts of APAC was and still is a huge net benefit to the world.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
I read recently that the caste system in India dates back to the arrival of conquering Aryan tribesmen, what, 5000 years ago. It's as if the distinction between Spartans and Helots in southern Greece persisted into the modern day and for thousands of years into the future.
Not really an invasion, more a migration.
Yes, but a migration which ended with the descendants of those migrants taking all the best and most privileged roles for themselves and excluding the descendants of the indigenous people? I should stress this is based on one thing I read - I do not claim expertise.
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
I think Cummings apparently being silenced with legal issues has slowed things down quite a bit. Before the police investigation there was the anticipation of something new from him every couple of days, to change or accelerate the direction.
They don't need Cummings. The BBC are on the case and with their ruthless professionalism they're showing how it's done. Extended interviews with Rifkind Major and today Patten don't happen by accident. Guess what they thought of Boris?
Sending Nadine Dorries to breeze around the studios telling them what they could expect was always a mistake. They are an ultra professional well oiled machine. You don't patronise them and you don't send a clown's gofer to threaten them
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
The feeling is that Tory MPs will not send letters on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday.
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Gray gave her update on Monday, which confirmed Bojo broke the ministerial code and is under criminal investigation, drawing a straight line between the cultural failings and the leadership. Swiftly followed by the Savile calamity.
Monday! They had half of Monday, and then all of Tues, Wed and Thurs. What are the useless fuckers waiting for?
To be honest I think they are waiting for the full Gray report and/or the moment Boris Johnson is fined.
Right now if the wins the VOC he will continue for at least the next 12 months, so wait to strike when he's at his most vulnerable.
Lawmakers cannot be lawbreakers.
So that takes us to when exactly? May? The autumn? 2023?
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
It's just plain nasty.
A dark joke could be made about the kind of people who, being racist about Gypsies, would agree with such a statement.
But that "joke" isn't about that. It's just plain racism.
Yeah, if thats the full "joke" then he has not crossed the line but obliterated it.
Edit - seen suggestions downthread there is more context, which would make more sense.
I'm not sure context helps much. If he added "actually, some of my best friends are Gypsies...."?
It probably wouldn't help but enough for me to reserve judgment. On its own it doesn't really make any sense for an experienced TV comedian to think it worth saying.
You never heard of the Aristocrats joke? There was a good docco about it back in the day. Comedians competing to tell their version of the worlds most offensive joke. Gilbert Gottfried won it for me. Though Cartman’s was also top notch. What is it with everyone getting triggered now? So tedious.
No not heard of any of that, unless Cartman is the one from Southpark? Who suddenly reminds me a little of a less successful Boris Johnson.....
Re Ancoats & Beswick. I know the area fairly well (I work just over the other side of Gt Ancoats Street) and while the New Islington bit is becoming a bit yuppified, most of Beswick, Miles Platting and Bradford is still very solidly working class.
As I understand it, a lot of the vote here has gone against Labour because of a bullying issue forcing out the previous councillor. There's also the background issue of how badly the refurbishment of Great Ancoats Street has gone (city centre LDs have focused on transport in their campaigning for a while now), and perhaps an underlying discontent with the absolute (unrepresentative) stranglehold Labour councillors have on Manchester, with attendant complacency and sloppiness.
I wouldn't draw any conclusions at all about the national picture from this.
I'd say Great Ancoats Street is looking splendid. A real success story. Granted the works were a right kerfuffle. But which works aren't?
It's not my idea of splendour, though I'd have accepted merely practical.
Well ok, it's not the Champs Elysees, yet. But it's almost unrecognisable from what it was 15 years ago. Importantly, it's lined with active frontages of businesses you might like to frequent. And the interruption of the canal and the space next to it is rather nicely done. I'd say a step up from 'practical' - Trinity Way is 'practical'. Manchester does get some things wrong, but it gets far more right than it does wrong, and it does such a lot, that the frequency of success is gratifyingly high. And I'd put Great Ancoats Street firmly in the 'success' category.
Er, what? It looks boring and in parts hideous on that Google Street View
And I would LOVE to believe you. It would be great to think we are rebuilding our cities better. Any links?
That Streetview is from 18 months ago and a lot has changed since then. Look, it's a dual carriageway. It's part of the Manchester and Salford Inner Ring Road. It's not the Shambles in York. But it looks substantially better than that now. It's moderatly pleasant to walk down - that section which has recently been redone, anyway. It's certainly got life and businesses on it, where it used to be a godforsaken stretch of tamac and a rubbish retail park. It separates Ancoats and the Northern Quarter but doesn't sever them. Where once was a ring road there emerges a neighbourhood.
This is not a 60s demolition of the commercial core of the city to replace with something uglier, but a 2020s demolition of post-inudtrial nothing with a functioning neighbourhood.
You should, when you get the chance, come to Manchester; take a walk around Ancoats, and the Northern Quarter, and Crown Street, and the left bank, and Chapel Street, and NOMA. Regeneration far outranks decay. Not all of it perfect. But Leon, the energy and pace of change: not something I ever thought I'd see in this country outside of London.
Sure, I'd like perfect Georgian cityscapes. But we never had that to start with in Manchester. Ancoats moved straight from dark satanic mills to post-industrial wasteland. And now it is one of the most sought-after areas in the North. It is astonishing.
Fair enough, and Yay if it is true. You are right, I need to see it for myself. And I have heard this from others: Manc is much improved, becoming a proper, handsome European city
I seldom ever go there, the last time was maybe 15-20 years ago, and it was quite depressing then. For some reason my job/life takes me to many other UK cities, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Cardiff, Newcastle, Bristol, but not Manchester
However, on my last visit, I DO remember wandering around some of the down-at-heel Victorian districts and thinking: wow, if they ever do this up, it will be spectacular. Glasgow's Victorian quarter, for example, is now quite something
When I visit our Manchester office I can see the statue of Engels out of the window. Reason enough to pay a visit.
More well known the room where Karl Marx penned 'Workers of the World Unite........"
Something you won’t know…Marx loved the island and spent several winters here toward the end of his life.
The house in which he wintered is now divided into some very nice holiday lets.
The idea that Indians could not have alternatively found justice and rule of law is unproven at best, especially considering Britain's accentuation of religion and "race" to divide and conquer - one of its legacies to independent India being the idea of a "martial race", after all.
I agree with Max, I know we're horrible racists because, checks notes, our antecedents are from that part of the world.
Noone called you racists but the case is unproven. Japan Westernised in about a decade of occupation. It didn't take centuries of extraction.
Lol, you don't even see how ridiculous your own argument is, do you?
The idea that Indians could not have alternatively found justice and rule of law is unproven at best, especially considering Britain's accentuation of religion and "race" to divide and conquer - one of its legacies to independent India being the idea of a "martial race", after all.
I agree with Max, I know we're horrible racists because, checks notes, our antecedents are from that part of the world.
Noone called you racists but the case is unproven. Japan Westernised in about a decade of occupation. It didn't take centuries of extraction.
Japan modernised over much of century. The removal of the militaristic fuckwits from the top of the pile was the last big piece of the puzzle.
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
The feeling is that Tory MPs will not send letters on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday.
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Gray gave her update on Monday, which confirmed Bojo broke the ministerial code and is under criminal investigation, drawing a straight line between the cultural failings and the leadership. Swiftly followed by the Savile calamity.
Monday! They had half of Monday, and then all of Tues, Wed and Thurs. What are the useless fuckers waiting for?
To be honest I think they are waiting for the full Gray report and/or the moment Boris Johnson is fined.
Right now if the wins the VOC he will continue for at least the next 12 months, so wait to strike when he's at his most vulnerable.
Lawmakers cannot be lawbreakers.
So that takes us to when exactly? May? The autumn? 2023?
May.
Unless more damaging things come out/another screw up.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
That is pretty gruesome, when you consider the horrific experiments the Nazis did on Roma people in the camps, for instance.
Personally I find Jimmy Carr unfunny and the joke as written offensive in the extreme.
But free speech…
Free speech? No one stopped him saying it. That is what free speech is - he can say what he likes. And he did so.
However, if I was hiring a comedian, I would hire one that made me and my audience laugh, not one that would offend and upset them.
No one has to hire an ar*ehole just because he likes running his mouth ...
Sure. If people don’t want to see him or book him that is also their right.
He’s a punch-downer, which is why he’s unfunny. See also David Walliams.
Little Britain was definitely unfunny. As far as I could see, they recycled the same sketches every week.
I'd guess there's a pretty good chance any impressive monument from ancient or even closer to modern times was built by shits, or as part of a society and culture that had shitty elements to it. It isn't pretending it was all benign to not focus on the downsides of that.
Taken to it’s logical end, we should tear down every building and monument because previous generations did all sorts of terrible things.
I personally think - and don’t press me on the logic - that the Nazi regime was uniquely awful and that therefore there’s a decent case for the removal of Nazi symbolism etc, which of course has been done.
I was surprised that the podium from which Hitler gave his Nuremberg speeches is still there, in front of the colonnaded backdrop with only the swastika atop missing, blown up by the Americans shortly after the war.
When I dropped by in September, the structure was being used by a fitness group for their exercise class, and while standing looking out at the arena from precisely where Hitler stood, my dog decided it was a good place to drop some poop.
Your dog has excellent taste.
Although I'm sure it was a less terrible shit than the one that used to be there.
Those who attack, or even more bizarrely, are 'ashamed' of, the British empire never seem to get round to telling us what counterfactual they are comparing it with. Presumably not a French, Dutch, or German empire, so I guess they must be dreaming about some fantasy world where the alternative in all the places the British ended up ruling was a cross between a Rousseauesque noble-savage purity and a Swedish social democracy, magically combining democratic self-rule with the advances of the industrial revolution and the values of the European Enlightenment.
Reader, that wasn't the alternative.
In principle, it sounds like you think Britain should rule all other countries today? After all, that's not the alternative today either.
Apart this bit of self-serving twaddle anything happened today on the Boris front? The trickle seems to have dried up so far as I can tell.
The feeling is that Tory MPs will not send letters on a Friday/Saturday/Sunday.
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Gray gave her update on Monday, which confirmed Bojo broke the ministerial code and is under criminal investigation, drawing a straight line between the cultural failings and the leadership. Swiftly followed by the Savile calamity.
Monday! They had half of Monday, and then all of Tues, Wed and Thurs. What are the useless fuckers waiting for?
To be honest I think they are waiting for the full Gray report and/or the moment Boris Johnson is fined.
Right now if the wins the VOC he will continue for at least the next 12 months, so wait to strike when he's at his most vulnerable.
Lawmakers cannot be lawbreakers.
So that takes us to when exactly? May? The autumn? 2023?
May.
Unless more damaging things come out/another screw up.
What a waste. Half a year gone. These guys don’t deserve a majority if this is how they choose to use it.
Comments
I personally think - and don’t press me on the logic - that the Nazi regime was uniquely awful and that therefore there’s a decent case for the removal of Nazi symbolism etc, which of course has been done.
But I’m v reluctant about everything else, even the Communist stuff in Eastern Europe, Russia etc.
The locals show them off proudly. There is zero resentment of the British here, there has been no attempt at all to rename the endless streets citing Victoria, Albert, Edward, Windsor, and so on.
Having just read a marvellous history of Sri Lanka....
https://www.amazon.com/Elephant-Complex-Travels-Vintage-Departures/dp/0345806999
.... I can see why. Before the Brits arrived the island was ravaged with violence, the Dutch and Portuguese used it for slaving, but failed to quell the eternal unrest, after the Brits left, there was an insurrection, then a Marxist blood letting, then a civil war. The period of British rule was an unparalleled century and a half of peace, by Sri Lankan standards, and saw much improvement of roads, rails, education, etc
I am not whitewashing the British Empire, but this is one place where it does seem to have been a genuinely positive influence
It is arguable whether the Sri Lankans even wanted independence. Historians dispute this
Compare and contrast with attitudes to China, now. The Chinese are really NOT popular. Sri Lankans feel they have been hoodwinked into a kind of debt bondage
Once the threshold is met, the vote is held the next working Parliamentary day, so if the trigger is reached today it gives Boris Johnson three days to try and buy off Tory MPs.
If the trigger is reached on a Monday/Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday it gives Boris Johnson fewer than 24 hours to win over Tory MPs.
Replaced by some unsightly temporary construction site boarding.
The problem was not I think Roosevelt, but the fact that he was on horseback, accompanied by a presumably loyal and grateful “negro” and a Native American.
I’m not sure how I feel about it. It was a decent statue, but yes the racial symbolism was not fantastic.
Perhaps the rule should be, if you want to tear down a statue, you should be forced to replace it.
At the same time if we don't hit the numbers next Monday - Tuesday I don't see it occurring until May unless another big story arrives in the meantime.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/21/arts/design/roosevelt-statue-to-be-removed-from-museum-of-natural-history.html
Maybe a dinosaur instead?
At last.
British justice and rule of law still underpins Indian law and justice, which is a huge, huge positive for Indian people who would otherwise be subject to some kind of odd religious mix of rules and natural laws as we can see in Islamic countries. The equal status of women in India is a result of the empire, in most Hindu sects women are second class citizens and without the empire they would absolutely be considered as such today, to a much more noticeable degree.
People like Heathener want to take a one dimensional look at complicated issues, the rest of us should be able to look beyond that.
https://twitter.com/Frances_Coppola/status/1489652293523943430?s=20&t=mUDFtkgD_8EXRxsvwebWxA
But with a smidgeon of believability.
The best retort was Nabavi’s upthread.
Oh, so Scottish taxpayers are also going to pay for English pensions, then?
Is the fix going in?
https://twitter.com/HMD_UK/status/1489616315920883716
It's complicated. I identify with Cheshire AND with Greater Manchester. And with the wider North West, and the wider North, and England, and Great Britain, and the UK, and the British Isles, and Europe...
And I'd also like permanent and immutable counties that we can agree on yhe borders of for the purposes of quiz questions.
Cheshire and Lancashire have better names, but I certainly don't argue that GM doesn't exist. And local government doesn't have to echo County boundaries.
As I said - complicated.
‘When people talk about the Holocaust, they talk about the tragedy and horror of six million Jewish lives being lost to the Nazi war machine. But they never mention the thousands of Gypsies that were killed by the Nazis. No one ever wants to talk about that, because no one ever wants to talk about the positives.’
I'm not in favour of cancellation, but it's pretty repulsive. Substitute 'gays' for 'Gypsies' and a lot more would be offended.
White settlers (often with the connivance of the colonial government) confiscated huge amounts of land from Māori tribes, and Māori culture was largely suppressed, benignly or otherwise, as Pakeha set about creating the Dominion.
Yet, yet.
If one plays the Rawlsian game, there really were few better places to be born - whether Pakeha or Māori - than NZ in the 80s.
Relatively prosperous, largely uncorrupt, mostly egalitarian, and broadly tolerant. Largely because of British constitutional thinking, British rule of law, and British (or Anglican and Presbyterian) sensibilities on what a just society looks like.
I consider myself blessed to inherit that.
The argument around their independence - and today is Sri Lankan independence day - is fascinating. Essentially indy for Ceylon was demanded by a small elite, a few very rich posh families. Meanwhile the weary British - distracted by the great unravelling of the Raj - were happy to let it happen. Celyon was a sideshow
Yet lots of thoughtful Sri Lankans said Wait, we have had 150 years of Pax Britannica, if we go indy we will return to brutal infighting.
And that, of course, is exactly what happened. I had no idea how bloody and awful Sri Lanka's modern history has been, until I read that book. The Tamil-Sinhalese war is just one part of it. Endless gruesome massacres, and terror
I'm neither proud nor ashamed of our colonial heritage, but it's necessary to look at it with a clear eye and not pretend the bad stuff didn't happen.
But free speech…
A dark joke could be made about the kind of people who, being racist about Gypsies, would agree with such a statement.
But that "joke" isn't about that. It's just plain racism.
It would be quite the irony if he gets cancelled for a poor joke he made up just to see what gets you cancelled
Out of context (if this exists) it is clearly grotesque
I'd assumed that the colonial thing would have made it a massive issue.
Edit - seen suggestions downthread there is more context, which would make more sense.
£200 is not that far off. £100 for the alarms and £100 for the fitter.
However, if I was hiring a comedian, I would hire one that made me and my audience laugh, not one that would offend and upset them.
No one has to hire an ar*ehole just because he likes running his mouth ...
https://twitter.com/thatbloodyMikey/status/1489599828707397635?s=20&t=7dwNWtmfWuCjrOg-cS8OYA
There should be no legal consequences for offending people (unless inciting violence), and the safety of the offendee should be protected by the state if they receive threats a la Rushdie et al. But commercial, social or political consequences from offending people are just normal life.
He’s a punch-downer, which is why he’s unfunny. See also David Walliams.
Monday! They had half of Monday, and then all of Tues, Wed and Thurs. What are the useless fuckers waiting for?
Reader, that wasn't the alternative.
And if you want to know how that turned out, read this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/King-Leopolds-Ghost-Heroism-Colonial/dp/1509882200/ref=sr_1_1?crid=6PLRNWNF3H58&keywords=king+leopolds+ghost+book&qid=1643998008&s=books&sprefix=king+leopold,stripbooks,252&sr=1-1
When I dropped by in September, the structure was being used by a fitness group for their exercise class, and while standing looking out at the arena from precisely where Hitler stood, my dog decided it was a good place to drop some poop.
Arguably the ex British Empire countries have fared better if you compare the whole range - Britain has effectively left the US, Canada, Australia and NZ as positives and the negatives are on a par with anything left behind by France, Spain (look at South America - so much potential and it’s a shitshow). All European nations left behind a mess in Africa and as for Asia we have India and Pakistan at various degrees of success/failure to Singapore and Hong Kong until recently.
So to think that if we hadn’t had an Empire then these countries would be great is balls - they would have been taken over by another European Country - maybe even Belgium which I’m guessing aren’t the ideal colonists……
The reason it is funny - and it is, people laughed - is because he shames us for our selective identification of racism.
The joke is not "ho ho, fuck the gypsies"
It's an awkward "ah crap, he's right, why don't I apply the same standard to travellers?!"
It's very dark. He flips our self-righteousness on its head. And, as someone who grew up in a town with a deep loathing of the local travellers, it cuts deep.
Its entirely up to Netflix if it stays up. But I hope they understand the nuance.
Right now if the wins the VOC he will continue for at least the next 12 months, so wait to strike when he's at his most vulnerable.
Lawmakers cannot be lawbreakers.
I should stress this is based on one thing I read - I do not claim expertise.
Sending Nadine Dorries to breeze around the studios telling them what they could expect was always a mistake. They are an ultra professional well oiled machine. You don't patronise them and you don't send a clown's gofer to threaten them
The British ran it for 5 years from 1811.
Guess which side of the road they drive on?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60260220
The house in which he wintered is now divided into some very nice holiday lets.
Unless more damaging things come out/another screw up.
Although I'm sure it was a less terrible shit than the one that used to be there.