Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Starmer’s approval rating no change at -2% – politicalbetting.com

123578

Comments

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,929
    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047

    IshmaelZ said:

    If Brenda is so awesome why on earth is Prince Andrew her favourite child?

    I mean that's a great big red flag that she's got terrible judgment.

    Sometimes attributed to his striking resemblance to her very close friend Lord Porchester
    Thanks, I googled him and I got this.


    It's not easy to see from that photo, but he looks like he's got brown eyes. It would be unusual for a child with a brown-eyed parent to have blue eyes, as the brown-eyed gene is dominant.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,587
    Nigelb said:
    I am rather hoping they can't and Lisa Nandy becomes LOTO.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:


    I have no idea what a "Singapore Grip" is. Is it like being "regnal"?

    Well, it's nearly the lagershed.

    As a male's penis is in the female's vagina, the male chooses not to thrust. The Female then clenches the vagina and continues to have intercourse with the stationary man, simulating the feeling of a vigorous handjob.

    "Oh Honey, I've had a long day at work and don't feel likely pleasuring me, can we do the singapore grip tonight?


    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Singapore Grip

    which leads to Wallace Simpson and the Duke of Windsor.

    . "It's assumed she must have magic powers; that she must have hypnotised him. But nobody can put their finger on what it was about her. She wasn't even young; she was 40; she wasn't even beautiful. But clearly a woman who attracted three husbands must have had something." That something was rumoured to be a string of sex tricks learned in the brothels of the East, where she spent time with her first husband. The Shanghai Squeeze and Singapore Grip are both probably self-explanatory, but think "matchstick" and "cigar", and men, at least, might start to fathom her hold over Edward.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/the-return-of-wallis-simpson-2219771.html
    Sex may have been part of it. But a likely just as - if not more important - part of it was that she provided him with the unconditional love and support he did not get from his mother (or father).
    Indeed, if you ever wonder why Meghan and Harry are as they are, consider the same toxic parenting.
    I'm sort of inclined to say, fuck that. Parenting is something we all fail more or less badly at, and there's more than a hint of "Thank God I am not as other men are" in uninformed criticism of other parents' performance.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,089
    edited May 2022

    Recently I was promoted and it took me six months to update my profile on the corporate intranet.....

    Congratulations are in order for sex offender and now ex-MP Imran Ahmad Khan, whose early retirement has allowed him to get round to updating his Linkedin profile. His fellow users were notified today with news of his latest job:

    Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds, the procedural title given to MPs quitting the Commons. An exciting opportunity with room for professional growth and development…


    https://order-order.com/2022/05/09/imran-ahmad-khans-exciting-new-job/

    Wonder how long he will get to keep that job for?
    [Innocent face]
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Not to throw the cat amongst the PB pigeons, but I genuinely thought the wave of apologies had started drying up.

    Hard not to see this as one of the new wave of apologies that are for the benefit and enjoyment of the apologiser. And in this case close to meaningless to the apologised.
    https://twitter.com/b_judah/status/1523407246579081216?cxt=HHwWgIDRybi0naQqAAAA
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/08/apology-800-years-on-for-laws-that-expelled-jews-from-england
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    If Brenda is so awesome why on earth is Prince Andrew her favourite child?

    I mean that's a great big red flag that she's got terrible judgment.

    Sometimes attributed to his striking resemblance to her very close friend Lord Porchester
    Thanks, I googled him and I got this.


    It's not easy to see from that photo, but he looks like he's got brown eyes. It would be unusual for a child with a brown-eyed parent to have blue eyes, as the brown-eyed gene is dominant.
    We don't say genes any more we say alleles at loci (and the difference matters). It's not that straightforward, and there's been lots of unnecessary murders and stuff based on the misconception that brown invariably trumps blue.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,929

    Recently I was promoted and it took me six months to update my profile on the corporate intranet.....

    Congratulations are in order for sex offender and now ex-MP Imran Ahmad Khan, whose early retirement has allowed him to get round to updating his Linkedin profile. His fellow users were notified today with news of his latest job:

    Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds, the procedural title given to MPs quitting the Commons. An exciting opportunity with room for professional growth and development…


    https://order-order.com/2022/05/09/imran-ahmad-khans-exciting-new-job/

    One imagines satirists have been pulling Guido's plonker.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    edited May 2022

    Cyclefree said:


    I have no idea what a "Singapore Grip" is. Is it like being "regnal"?

    Well, it's nearly the lagershed.

    As a male's penis is in the female's vagina, the male chooses not to thrust. The Female then clenches the vagina and continues to have intercourse with the stationary man, simulating the feeling of a vigorous handjob.

    "Oh Honey, I've had a long day at work and don't feel likely pleasuring me, can we do the singapore grip tonight?


    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Singapore Grip

    which leads to Wallace Simpson and the Duke of Windsor.

    . "It's assumed she must have magic powers; that she must have hypnotised him. But nobody can put their finger on what it was about her. She wasn't even young; she was 40; she wasn't even beautiful. But clearly a woman who attracted three husbands must have had something." That something was rumoured to be a string of sex tricks learned in the brothels of the East, where she spent time with her first husband. The Shanghai Squeeze and Singapore Grip are both probably self-explanatory, but think "matchstick" and "cigar", and men, at least, might start to fathom her hold over Edward.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/the-return-of-wallis-simpson-2219771.html
    Sex may have been part of it. But a likely just as - if not more important - part of it was that she provided him with the unconditional love and support he did not get from his mother (or father).
    The rumour seems very mean. Also, I think in photographs she looks very striking, and quite beautiful. We're constantly told how ugly she was, but if she was that bad, one wonders how she got all the opportunities to prove her vulvic dexterity in the first place.
    There is a more flattering picture on wikipedia than the one that usually gets put about. This was Wallis Simpson in 1936, right around the time she was involved with Edward

    image
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575

    Nigelb said:
    I am rather hoping they can't and Lisa Nandy becomes LOTO.
    Well indeed.

    But reading the Guardian account, it rather looks as though Starmer’s crew are a bit more organised than the Mail (or indeed we) counted on.
    The chances of an FPN just dropped significantly.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    Not a view universally held by the anc hist community. good at being on telly though.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623
    If the monarchy wants to remain, then it ought to do exactly what political parties do to stay relevant and popular: relentlessly bribe people with as much shit as can be afforded (cough, I mean "have policies").
  • novanova Posts: 525

    IshmaelZ said:

    If Brenda is so awesome why on earth is Prince Andrew her favourite child?

    I mean that's a great big red flag that she's got terrible judgment.

    Sometimes attributed to his striking resemblance to her very close friend Lord Porchester
    Thanks, I googled him and I got this.


    It's not easy to see from that photo, but he looks like he's got brown eyes. It would be unusual for a child with a brown-eyed parent to have blue eyes, as the brown-eyed gene is dominant.
    I'm not sure it's true that it's that unusual. Eye colour is a lot more complicated.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    If Brenda is so awesome why on earth is Prince Andrew her favourite child?

    I mean that's a great big red flag that she's got terrible judgment.

    Sometimes attributed to his striking resemblance to her very close friend Lord Porchester
    Thanks, I googled him and I got this.


    It's not easy to see from that photo, but he looks like he's got brown eyes. It would be unusual for a child with a brown-eyed parent to have blue eyes, as the brown-eyed gene is dominant.
    We don't say genes any more we say alleles at loci (and the difference matters). It's not that straightforward, and there's been lots of unnecessary murders and stuff based on the misconception that brown invariably trumps blue.
    That's why said 'unusual' not 'impossible'.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    edited May 2022
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    kle4 said:

    Not to throw the cat amongst the PB pigeons, but I genuinely thought the wave of apologies had started drying up.

    Hard not to see this as one of the new wave of apologies that are for the benefit and enjoyment of the apologiser. And in this case close to meaningless to the apologised.
    https://twitter.com/b_judah/status/1523407246579081216?cxt=HHwWgIDRybi0naQqAAAA
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/08/apology-800-years-on-for-laws-that-expelled-jews-from-england

    That seems to me relevant to the whole Queenie debate. If she matters, it matters that her ancestor and predecessor in the role did this, and it is absolutely right for her church to apologise.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,089

    IshmaelZ said:

    If Brenda is so awesome why on earth is Prince Andrew her favourite child?

    I mean that's a great big red flag that she's got terrible judgment.

    Sometimes attributed to his striking resemblance to her very close friend Lord Porchester
    Thanks, I googled him and I got this.


    It's not easy to see from that photo, but he looks like he's got brown eyes. It would be unusual for a child with a brown-eyed parent to have blue eyes, as the brown-eyed gene is dominant.
    Well, Brown/Blue and Blue/Blue produces equal numbers of Brown and blue eyes.

    Brown/brown and Blue/Blue produces all brown.

    I have brown eyes, and my sister blue, from Brown eyed mother and blue eyed father.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047
    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    But if she was losing, she could always give him a bit of the old Sharon Stone and throw him into bumbling chaos.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    Putting you in the Some of the people, all of the time category.

    "Honest, he's been on telly and everything about it."
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704

    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    But if she was losing, she could always give him a bit of the old Sharon Stone and throw him into bumbling chaos.
    😳😳
  • UnpopularUnpopular Posts: 775
    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    Johnson won the debate, I believe. Or rather, Marr gave it to him, due to a perceived (on my part) Greek bias. Personally, of the two, I thought Beard was stronger.

    It's been a while since I watched it, but I actually remember that debate pretty fondly.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    edited May 2022
    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Volkswagen chief calls for settlement to end Ukraine war to help EU economy

    https://www.ft.com/content/f8c2482d-c7af-4d7e-87e7-87562194250b

    Remind me of the origins of the volkswagen name and marque?
    Next: Rheinmettal Krupps demands that Kyiv sits down to negotiate, and I G Farben calls for “free exports of gas”
    Rheinmetall AG and Krupp were different companies entirely ...
    Never interrupt an ill informed rant.

    “1990 Rheinmetall GmbH acquires a 60-percent-share of MaK System GmbH of Kiel, a unit of Fried. Krupp GmbH”

    https://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rheinmetall_defence/company/corporate_history/1950_1998/index.php
    A part of is not the whole. Any more than Leon is part of [edit]* but not the whole entity that is ...

    *Blame some Chilean red and a rather heavy mean of bacon, peston pasta, rhubarb and ground rice pudding.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774

    Sandpit said:

    Russian finance minister: GDP could fall 12% this year, due to sanctions.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/05/09/ftse-100-markets-live-news-russia-energy-mccolls/

    Not enough I have to say. I presume that is without an oil embargo and much of a move on gas supplies? Even if it takes a few years for the economic effects to be completely felt the important thing is for the elite to find themselves staring into the abyss.
    There can be no meaningful oil embargo because there are plenty of countries willing to buy Russian oil. Ditto coal exports.

    If the gas pipelines from Russia to Europe are severed (in one way or another), that would have a bigger impact, but it is worth remembering that (even before the recent rises in the oil price), gas exports were only about a sixth of oil exports - https://oec.world/en/profile/country/rus
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149

    Carnyx said:

    I think we will find out lots about the immense contribution made by Queen Elizabeth II in the future.

    Like: she was almost singlehandedly responsible for the successful transition from the Empire to the Commonwealth and personally for preserving well over a dozen Commonwealth Realms into the 21st Century. She also gave a huge boost to the projection of British soft power on the European, US and global stage through the respect and admiration she commanded.

    Never let it be said that monarchs are 'just' figureheads.

    In which case you have singlehandedly destroyed the glorious UK (mostly English) constitution. They have no right to be otherwise; they are absolute menaces if they are not figureheads.

    You are confusing policy and executive action with the conduct and work of a monarch in office.

    Queen Elizabeth II has always served the interests of the UK and has done so with a level of decorum and diplomacy that has commanded respect and admiration throughout the world. She, and thus the UK, has become more influential as a result. But she isn't making up policy on the hoof - she's acting in our interests and on our behalf.

    That is a good thing.
    It is a shame she is nearly dead then and that her son has a track record of voicing his opinions (usually on architecture TBF), but there is nothing constraining him from acting as he pleases.

    She made a choice, he can as well and it may not be as pleasant a choice. That is the weakness of the system.
    Not just voicing his opinions. Actively interfering in legislative acts in Edinbuirgh and London, or at least trying to.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    I think we will find out lots about the immense contribution made by Queen Elizabeth II in the future.

    Like: she was almost singlehandedly responsible for the successful transition from the Empire to the Commonwealth and personally for preserving well over a dozen Commonwealth Realms into the 21st Century. She also gave a huge boost to the projection of British soft power on the European, US and global stage through the respect and admiration she commanded.

    Never let it be said that monarchs are 'just' figureheads.

    Given the number of places that clearly want to be Republics yet are holding off (apparently not presently willing to follow Barbados in this) there must be some personal element involved.

    Many things, people or actions are symbolic - but symbols have power.
    Do we know they want to be republics? Surely if they wanted it that much they would now be republics?

    Anyway, republics are shit and boring. You either have a political and divisive President (France /USA) or one that no-one ever hears about or knows (Ireland/Germany).

    Monarchs are better but there are rules you have to play by. They fall when their egos get the better of them, as ours would have done post WWII during the Attlee administration had Edward VIII not abdicated.
    Looking at the list of realms ruled by Glorious Britain, sorry, voluntary members of the regnal Commonwealth, they are:


    “Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.”

    Of those I’d say Oz, Jamaica and Belize are the most likely to go, first. But there is a question mark over all of them. For Oz it’s just an arse-ache - why bother if you are such a successful country, and this is source of stability? - for the other two it’s the opposite. Do you really need the extra INstability?

    I think it's only been me and you on here who've, consistently, argued for the monarchy. Perhaps backed by a handful of others.

    As you rightly said: most pb.com posters are number nerds who are somewhat on the spectrum and simply don't 'get' the powerful emotional reasonance and symbolism of the monarchy, nor why it's so valuable.
    When we're talking about matters of emotional resonance, the people disagreeing with you aren't "not getting it". They just disagree. But to imply that their subjective view is the result of a diagnosable condition is way off. Come on.
    Republicanism is heavily overrepresented on here compared to the population at large.

    That is the reason, together with some misplaced sense of intellectual superiority.
    You've just ticked off another poster for pomposity and now you're telling me my republicanism is a symptom of my autism?

    Yep.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,749
    edited May 2022
    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    Mrs C & I did have a very small rise in our pensions when we got to 80.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    I don't think you need to be an expert in a subject to manage either of those things, particularly if you are a big name for some other reason.

    I don't doubt he knows more about it than me, and can be entertaining about it, but it wouldn't mean he is an expert. I mean, is Terry Dreary a great historian? IDK, but he's sold a lot of books on the subject.

    (This is not to say 'amateurs' might not be able to produce excellent history in the field, as some certainly have).
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited May 2022
    Biden appears to have slashed the deficit by 80%.

    https://twitter.com/USCBO/status/1523725222247284736?t=wEaY2y-IP5eazbdDPiDRjQ&s=19

    Once again Dem presidents cleaning up Republican messes.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146


    After 'Save Big Dog', we get 'Save Little Dog'.

    What’s Davey? Mute dog?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,165
    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    My parents experienced rationing. I know this because they tell me at least once a week.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.



    I'm sure Charles can go, being Duke of Edinburgh now.
  • UnpopularUnpopular Posts: 775
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:
    I am rather hoping they can't and Lisa Nandy becomes LOTO.
    Well indeed.

    But reading the Guardian account, it rather looks as though Starmer’s crew are a bit more organised than the Mail (or indeed we) counted on.
    The chances of an FPN just dropped significantly.
    People think he's shit at politics. I think he's actually rather good.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Russian finance minister: GDP could fall 12% this year, due to sanctions.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/05/09/ftse-100-markets-live-news-russia-energy-mccolls/

    Not enough I have to say. I presume that is without an oil embargo and much of a move on gas supplies? Even if it takes a few years for the economic effects to be completely felt the important thing is for the elite to find themselves staring into the abyss.
    They made bank over the spring, as the Germans kept the oil and gas flowing at high prices. Next autumn is key, need to make sure there’s no European demand for Russian O&G exports - which will screw up their production as the storage gets full.
    It will make no difference to demand for Russian oil, because (while there's a shortage of LNG vessels), there are thousands of shitty old oil tankers than can be brought into service if day rates get high enough.

    All that will happen (and in fact is happening), is that Russia is getting $80-86/barrel from the Chinese and the Indians, while US/Nigerian/Middle Eastern producers are getting $100-110 from the democracies.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.


    So many questions about that photo, and also surely they should have a spare title for NI and go as the Mcgillycuddies of Armagh or sinilar?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    tlg86 said:

    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    My parents experienced rationing. I know this because they tell me at least once a week.
    Used to have to take my ration book to Scout camp.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Russian finance minister: GDP could fall 12% this year, due to sanctions.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/05/09/ftse-100-markets-live-news-russia-energy-mccolls/

    Not enough I have to say. I presume that is without an oil embargo and much of a move on gas supplies? Even if it takes a few years for the economic effects to be completely felt the important thing is for the elite to find themselves staring into the abyss.
    They made bank over the spring, as the Germans kept the oil and gas flowing at high prices. Next autumn is key, need to make sure there’s no European demand for Russian O&G exports - which will screw up their production as the storage gets full.
    It will make no difference to demand for Russian oil, because (while there's a shortage of LNG vessels), there are thousands of shitty old oil tankers than can be brought into service if day rates get high enough.

    All that will happen (and in fact is happening), is that Russia is getting $80-86/barrel from the Chinese and the Indians, while US/Nigerian/Middle Eastern producers are getting $100-110 from the democracies.
    Which is a cost.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,765
    Republicans' biggest problem in this country is that they just seem weird and obssessive to most people.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,929
    edited May 2022
    OT Channel 4 9pm (ie now-ish) The Spy Who Died Twice about John Stonehouse, from the days when MPs' scandals were about more than late-night curries and tractor porn.

    Politician John Stonehouse faked his own death in the 1970s and went to jail. But did the high-profile MP also spy for the Soviet bloc? And why was he never charged?
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,397
    In her book, "Woman', Natalie Angier passes on the speculation that Wallace Simpson may have suffered from AIS (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome). And that's all I know about that possibility, though I find AIS, and people's reaction to it, fascinating.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    You'd need to be about 80 at least today for that to even begin to be possible - born 1942. But where does anyone get a pension or compensation for an event that happened when one was about 3, unless it was the actual loss of a parent?

    BigG has a honourable mention for the V-2 strike near his home in Manchester, but I think he was quite small at the time. Nor has he defended the triple lock in the current circs, either.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    Alistair said:

    Biden appears to have slashed the deficit by 80%.

    https://twitter.com/USCBO/status/1523725222247284736?t=wEaY2y-IP5eazbdDPiDRjQ&s=19

    Once again Dem presidents cleaning up Republican messes.

    Or maybe just not having the 1.9 trillion 2021 stimmy package to pay for this year
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    Sean_F said:

    Republicans' biggest problem in this country is that they just seem weird and obssessive to most people.

    That's what they used to say about Brexiteers back in the day, when Alan Sked led UKIP.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,749
    IshmaelZ said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.


    So many questions about that photo, and also surely they should have a spare title for NI and go as the Mcgillycuddies of Armagh or sinilar?
    You're much more au fait with that kind of thing than me but is that St Kilda?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Sean_F said:

    Republicans' biggest problem in this country is that they just seem weird and obssessive to most people.

    It's a reasonable and rational opinion to hold, albeit one I don't share. Some just get a tad overexcited, which when most people don't care much could be an error. I presume that's why arguments often seem to hinge on a world weary 'It is time' approach or even a 'It's an awful life in that gilded cage benevolence' more than the 'I am a free man/woman, not a subject!' kind of stuff.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    kle4 said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.



    I'm sure Charles can go, being Duke of Edinburgh now.
    Duke of Rothesay.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149

    IshmaelZ said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.


    So many questions about that photo, and also surely they should have a spare title for NI and go as the Mcgillycuddies of Armagh or sinilar?
    You're much more au fait with that kind of thing than me but is that St Kilda?
    I wondered too. Boreray.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    Carnyx said:

    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    You'd need to be about 80 at least today for that to even begin to be possible - born 1942. But where does anyone get a pension or compensation for an event that happened when one was about 3, unless it was the actual loss of a parent?

    BigG has a honourable mention for the V-2 strike near his home in Manchester, but I think he was quite small at the time. Nor has he defended the triple lock in the current circs, either.
    I was in the school playground when, high above us and a bit to the North, the tail light on a 'doodlebug' went out, meaning it was about to crash. We were all rushed into the shelters.

    Does that count?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    If Brenda is so awesome why on earth is Prince Andrew her favourite child?

    I mean that's a great big red flag that she's got terrible judgment.

    Sometimes attributed to his striking resemblance to her very close friend Lord Porchester
    Thanks, I googled him and I got this.


    It's not easy to see from that photo, but he looks like he's got brown eyes. It would be unusual for a child with a brown-eyed parent to have blue eyes, as the brown-eyed gene is dominant.
    We don't say genes any more we say alleles at loci (and the difference matters). It's not that straightforward, and there's been lots of unnecessary murders and stuff based on the misconception that brown invariably trumps blue.
    On par with looking similar, I'd have thought.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.



    I'm sure Charles can go, being Duke of Edinburgh now.
    Duke of Rothesay.
    That one too, but he'd had that for 70 years, the Edinburgh one is shiny and new, to provide a reason to renew his relationship with the country etc etc.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,758

    tlg86 said:

    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    My parents experienced rationing. I know this because they tell me at least once a week.
    Used to have to take my ration book to Scout camp.
    I never knew ration books were allowed to be Scouts!
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    I think we will find out lots about the immense contribution made by Queen Elizabeth II in the future.

    Like: she was almost singlehandedly responsible for the successful transition from the Empire to the Commonwealth and personally for preserving well over a dozen Commonwealth Realms into the 21st Century. She also gave a huge boost to the projection of British soft power on the European, US and global stage through the respect and admiration she commanded.

    Never let it be said that monarchs are 'just' figureheads.

    Given the number of places that clearly want to be Republics yet are holding off (apparently not presently willing to follow Barbados in this) there must be some personal element involved.

    Many things, people or actions are symbolic - but symbols have power.
    Do we know they want to be republics? Surely if they wanted it that much they would now be republics?

    Anyway, republics are shit and boring. You either have a political and divisive President (France /USA) or one that no-one ever hears about or knows (Ireland/Germany).

    Monarchs are better but there are rules you have to play by. They fall when their egos get the better of them, as ours would have done post WWII during the Attlee administration had Edward VIII not abdicated.
    Looking at the list of realms ruled by Glorious Britain, sorry, voluntary members of the regnal Commonwealth, they are:


    “Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.”

    Of those I’d say Oz, Jamaica and Belize are the most likely to go, first. But there is a question mark over all of them. For Oz it’s just an arse-ache - why bother if you are such a successful country, and this is source of stability? - for the other two it’s the opposite. Do you really need the extra INstability?

    I think it's only been me and you on here who've, consistently, argued for the monarchy. Perhaps backed by a handful of others.

    As you rightly said: most pb.com posters are number nerds who are somewhat on the spectrum and simply don't 'get' the powerful emotional reasonance and symbolism of the monarchy, nor why it's so valuable.
    When we're talking about matters of emotional resonance, the people disagreeing with you aren't "not getting it". They just disagree. But to imply that their subjective view is the result of a diagnosable condition is way off. Come on.
    Republicanism is heavily overrepresented on here compared to the population at large.

    That is the reason, together with some misplaced sense of intellectual superiority.
    Have you ever wondered if the support for the monarchy is in fact support QEII and that sad day when she passes on the support for the monarchy will evaporate?
    Even Charles now has a net favourable rating of +27%, William of +67%, almost the same as the Queen's +71%.

    The British monarchy has with the exception of the Protectorate lasted for a 1000 years in England, Scotland and then the UK with monarchs coming and going. The Queen has been a good one but her loss after a long reign will be no different to Victoria's after a long 64 year reign and then the Prince of Wales proved a better than expected monarch as Edward VIIth for his relatively short 9 year reign
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/12/02/public-opinion-prince-charles-improves-latest-roya
    There’s a strong argument when Liz, sadly, moves on that they should skip a generation to help make the monarchy more relevant to diverse, dynamic, modern Britain.

    King William.
    People have been saying that literally for decades, I don't think it is that strong of an argument at this point. A balding 40 year old may be closer to the average person in the country but is not that much more relevant. Especially as part of Will's appeal seems to be he is personally boring, like his grandmother - a steady hand.
    Skip straight to George. He’ll reach the age of majority in 7 years time in his northern kingdom.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    Erich von Daniken also had books published about ancient history. Dunno about TV, mind.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,704
    edited May 2022
    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    I don't think you need to be an expert in a subject to manage either of those things, particularly if you are a big name for some other reason.

    I don't doubt he knows more about it than me, and can be entertaining about it, but it wouldn't mean he is an expert. I mean, is Terry Dreary a great historian? IDK, but he's sold a lot of books on the subject.

    (This is not to say 'amateurs' might not be able to produce excellent history in the field, as some certainly have).

    I have a recording of his Rome series on dvd-r somewhere. May dig it out now.

    The series was 14 years ago.

    Point being, although it is Johnson, he clearly has some expertise on the subject and isnt just a layman. He has some expertise on the subject as well as she does.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,969
    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.



    I'm sure Charles can go, being Duke of Edinburgh now.
    Duke of Rothesay.
    That one too, but he'd had that for 70 years, the Edinburgh one is shiny and new, to provide a reason to renew his relationship with the country etc etc.
    Merge the two titles and create a super new Scottish title like the Duke of Glasgae.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:
    I am rather hoping they can't and Lisa Nandy becomes LOTO.
    Well indeed.

    But reading the Guardian account, it rather looks as though Starmer’s crew are a bit more organised than the Mail (or indeed we) counted on.
    The chances of an FPN just dropped significantly.
    As perhaps have the chances of a Labour government in 2024 then...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    I worry about BJO, he antipathy to Starmer seems to have grown into a

    Carnyx said:

    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    You'd need to be about 80 at least today for that to even begin to be possible - born 1942. But where does anyone get a pension or compensation for an event that happened when one was about 3, unless it was the actual loss of a parent?

    BigG has a honourable mention for the V-2 strike near his home in Manchester, but I think he was quite small at the time. Nor has he defended the triple lock in the current circs, either.
    I was in the school playground when, high above us and a bit to the North, the tail light on a 'doodlebug' went out, meaning it was about to crash. We were all rushed into the shelters.

    Does that count?
    JackW is still traumatised by the Napoleonic war. He deserves a few extra shillings.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    IshmaelZ said:

    Former top manager of Lukoil and billionaire Alexander Subbotin has died after an anti-hangover session with a shaman. He experienced heart pain after using toad poison. The shaman didn’t call an ambulance but dripped Corvalol and put the billionaire to sleep in his basement.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1523481012281364480?s=20&t=W0p5r9sg0FlQkKUFbjiOgg

    I'm a bit worried about this, what toad poison are they on about? I do a fair amount of N,N-DMT which is the entry-level version of the toad-derived 5-MeO-DMT, having always thought it was physically harmless. Am I OK if I keep out of top level Russian politics?
    My understanding is that conveyencing is a real hoot on DMT.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    My parents experienced rationing. I know this because they tell me at least once a week.
    Used to have to take my ration book to Scout camp.
    I never knew ration books were allowed to be Scouts!
    Boy Scouts, at the time. PBpedantry.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    edited May 2022

    Carnyx said:

    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    You'd need to be about 80 at least today for that to even begin to be possible - born 1942. But where does anyone get a pension or compensation for an event that happened when one was about 3, unless it was the actual loss of a parent?

    BigG has a honourable mention for the V-2 strike near his home in Manchester, but I think he was quite small at the time. Nor has he defended the triple lock in the current circs, either.
    I was in the school playground when, high above us and a bit to the North, the tail light on a 'doodlebug' went out, meaning it was about to crash. We were all rushed into the shelters.

    Does that count?
    Very much so. YOu didn't just read Commando comics like my contemporaries and me. I did have a plastic kit of a V-1 with plastic red tail flame that sat on the TV for a few weeks ...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited May 2022

    Sean_F said:

    Republicans' biggest problem in this country is that they just seem weird and obssessive to most people.

    Funny you should say that.


    Sean_F said:

    Republicans' biggest problem in this country is that they just seem weird and obssessive to most people.

    Funny you should say that.


    An inspiring message of unity, as a man in suit and poncy hat and a dude in a beanie and a hoody with a t-shirt over it find common ground in their love of dead eyed dolls and flag pattened attire.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    RobD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    If Brenda is so awesome why on earth is Prince Andrew her favourite child?

    I mean that's a great big red flag that she's got terrible judgment.

    Sometimes attributed to his striking resemblance to her very close friend Lord Porchester
    Thanks, I googled him and I got this.


    It's not easy to see from that photo, but he looks like he's got brown eyes. It would be unusual for a child with a brown-eyed parent to have blue eyes, as the brown-eyed gene is dominant.
    We don't say genes any more we say alleles at loci (and the difference matters). It's not that straightforward, and there's been lots of unnecessary murders and stuff based on the misconception that brown invariably trumps blue.
    On par with looking similar, I'd have thought.
    Well, that's sort of the point. There is only very, very rarely "a gene" for X, and where there is X is usually an unusually horrific disease of one sort or another. But confluences of lotsa genes tend to have recognisably similar effects.

    Loyal post though, well done.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,243
    In hopes of pouring eco-friendly, biodegradable oil (supplied by BP) on troubled waters, allow me to launch extended discussion on merits AND demerits of AV in general, STV (RCV) in particular re: results of Northern Ireland 2022 Assembly elections.

    Where impact of party/beer-gate appears muted at best. Though backwash of Brexit AND Boris caused DUP to shed -3 seats thus giving SF (net 0) boost to become largest party in Assembly and thus in line (in theory anyway) to make Michelle O'Neill the new First Minister.

    This O'Neill would not be the first of that ilk to serve at the top at Stormont - that was Terence O'Neill.

    She would be the first woman . . . and also first something else that slips my mind . . .

    Rise of Alliance (+19) was most impressive, more than doubling their non-sectarian, progressive content. However, this was NOT achieved by any great shift in voter opinion, but by taking preferences away from (paradoxically NOT Nationalist) Greens (lost -2 now 0) as well as moderate SDLP (-4) and UUP (-1).

    Though not a big change, nevertheless welcome for the present AND future potential.

    Also fascinating that the Trots in form of People Before Profit (PBP) retained their 1 seat, ending up at same level in new Assembly as Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV). And ahead of the Greens - in Ireland.

    Plus as always enjoy following STV election counts on either side of the (hopefully soft) Irish (land) border. The follow of transfers (and non-transferables) from eliminations & surpluses from count to count is like an exciting bill of run of races at the track. With plenty of scope for twists, turns, wins and wipeouts as the ponies progress.

    And like the fact that local minorities can elect at least one of their own to represent them in the Assembly, for example one DUPer elected in West Belfast; presumably most of the 1st & subsequent preferences that elected her were cast by voters from the Shankill - and fair play to them.



  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,397
    As an American I want to apologize for Megan Markle. She doesn't seem to be able to get along with anyone, except her poor husband. And I can't help wondering whether the person who introduced the two wasn't acting on a Russian (or Chinese) suggestion. Yes, that's improbable, but the chances that she would cause problems for the monarchy should have been obviously high.

    (What should Elizabeth and Charles have done? Well, this is hindsight, but I think they should have found a job for Harry in Scotland, and hope that some Scottish lass would be willing to sacrifice for her nation, by taking him on.)
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    Carnyx said:

    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    Erich von Daniken also had books published about ancient history. Dunno about TV, mind.
    The 14 series of Ancient Aliens are down to his work, he also regularly appears on it
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,243
    IshmaelZ said:

    Former top manager of Lukoil and billionaire Alexander Subbotin has died after an anti-hangover session with a shaman. He experienced heart pain after using toad poison. The shaman didn’t call an ambulance but dripped Corvalol and put the billionaire to sleep in his basement.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1523481012281364480?s=20&t=W0p5r9sg0FlQkKUFbjiOgg

    I'm a bit worried about this, what toad poison are they on about? I do a fair amount of N,N-DMT which is the entry-level version of the toad-derived 5-MeO-DMT, having always thought it was physically harmless. Am I OK if I keep out of top level Russian politics?
    So are you licking toads to get high? Have heard of people doing that in US, but bit too rich for my tongue!
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Sean_F said:

    Republicans' biggest problem in this country is that they just seem weird and obssessive to most people.

    Funny you should say that.


    :lol:

    I post that face iff I have genuinely laughed out loud. That is fucking extraordinary.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    Alistair said:

    Cannot find it but someone on here once said as a reply to me that Boomers deserved generous pensions due to their suffering in WW2.

    When it was pointed out that Boomers weren't alive in the war they doubled down and said they deserved the pension due to the mental anguish of maybe and Uncle dying in the war

    My parents experienced rationing. I know this because they tell me at least once a week.
    Used to have to take my ration book to Scout camp.
    I never knew ration books were allowed to be Scouts!
    Boy Scouts, at the time. PBpedantry.
    Sea Scouts, to be strictly accurate. To be fair there wasn't a lot which was still on ration by then. Chocolate was!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774

    IshmaelZ said:

    If Brenda is so awesome why on earth is Prince Andrew her favourite child?

    I mean that's a great big red flag that she's got terrible judgment.

    Sometimes attributed to his striking resemblance to her very close friend Lord Porchester
    Thanks, I googled him and I got this.


    It's not easy to see from that photo, but he looks like he's got brown eyes. It would be unusual for a child with a brown-eyed parent to have blue eyes, as the brown-eyed gene is dominant.
    Not that unusual, otherwise the number of blue eyed children would be trending towards zero*.

    FWIW, my wife has brown eyes, and I have blue/green. One of our two children has my coloured eyes, and the other my wife's.

    * Unless, of course, those with blue eyes were significantly more fertile.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149

    Carnyx said:

    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    Erich von Daniken also had books published about ancient history. Dunno about TV, mind.
    The 14 series of Ancient Aliens are down to his work, he also regularly appears on it
    The things one learns on PB.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,749

    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.



    I'm sure Charles can go, being Duke of Edinburgh now.
    Duke of Rothesay.
    That one too, but he'd had that for 70 years, the Edinburgh one is shiny and new, to provide a reason to renew his relationship with the country etc etc.
    Merge the two titles and create a super new Scottish title like the Duke of Glasgae.
    Duke of Harthill, symbolising that magical point where East meets West in the central belt.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,043
    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    I think we will find out lots about the immense contribution made by Queen Elizabeth II in the future.

    Like: she was almost singlehandedly responsible for the successful transition from the Empire to the Commonwealth and personally for preserving well over a dozen Commonwealth Realms into the 21st Century. She also gave a huge boost to the projection of British soft power on the European, US and global stage through the respect and admiration she commanded.

    Never let it be said that monarchs are 'just' figureheads.

    Given the number of places that clearly want to be Republics yet are holding off (apparently not presently willing to follow Barbados in this) there must be some personal element involved.

    Many things, people or actions are symbolic - but symbols have power.
    Do we know they want to be republics? Surely if they wanted it that much they would now be republics?

    Anyway, republics are shit and boring. You either have a political and divisive President (France /USA) or one that no-one ever hears about or knows (Ireland/Germany).

    Monarchs are better but there are rules you have to play by. They fall when their egos get the better of them, as ours would have done post WWII during the Attlee administration had Edward VIII not abdicated.
    Looking at the list of realms ruled by Glorious Britain, sorry, voluntary members of the regnal Commonwealth, they are:


    “Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.”

    Of those I’d say Oz, Jamaica and Belize are the most likely to go, first. But there is a question mark over all of them. For Oz it’s just an arse-ache - why bother if you are such a successful country, and this is source of stability? - for the other two it’s the opposite. Do you really need the extra INstability?

    I think it's only been me and you on here who've, consistently, argued for the monarchy. Perhaps backed by a handful of others.

    As you rightly said: most pb.com posters are number nerds who are somewhat on the spectrum and simply don't 'get' the powerful emotional reasonance and symbolism of the monarchy, nor why it's so valuable.
    When we're talking about matters of emotional resonance, the people disagreeing with you aren't "not getting it". They just disagree. But to imply that their subjective view is the result of a diagnosable condition is way off. Come on.
    Republicanism is heavily overrepresented on here compared to the population at large.

    That is the reason, together with some misplaced sense of intellectual superiority.
    Have you ever wondered if the support for the monarchy is in fact support QEII and that sad day when she passes on the support for the monarchy will evaporate?
    Even Charles now has a net favourable rating of +27%, William of +67%, almost the same as the Queen's +71%.

    The British monarchy has with the exception of the Protectorate lasted for a 1000 years in England, Scotland and then the UK with monarchs coming and going. The Queen has been a good one but her loss after a long reign will be no different to Victoria's after a long 64 year reign and then the Prince of Wales proved a better than expected monarch as Edward VIIth for his relatively short 9 year reign
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/12/02/public-opinion-prince-charles-improves-latest-roya
    There’s a strong argument when Liz, sadly, moves on that they should skip a generation to help make the monarchy more relevant to diverse, dynamic, modern Britain.

    King William.
    People have been saying that literally for decades, I don't think it is that strong of an argument at this point. A balding 40 year old may be closer to the average person in the country but is not that much more relevant. Especially as part of Will's appeal seems to be he is personally boring, like his grandmother - a steady hand.
    You can't skip a generation in an hereditary monarchy. Charles to abdicate in advance?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited May 2022
    Carnyx said:

    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    Erich von Daniken also had books published about ancient history. Dunno about TV, mind.
    Apparently he is still alive - and probably very happy about how much TV and movie material seems inspired by or influenced by his ideals. People love ancient astronaut theory.

    I remember Paul Merton joking about how the answer was always No to Erich's questions.

    Could this be a UFO from the 12th century? No

    Could this be a landing platform for an alien scacecraft? No

    Could this... "No, no no"
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    Former top manager of Lukoil and billionaire Alexander Subbotin has died after an anti-hangover session with a shaman. He experienced heart pain after using toad poison. The shaman didn’t call an ambulance but dripped Corvalol and put the billionaire to sleep in his basement.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1523481012281364480?s=20&t=W0p5r9sg0FlQkKUFbjiOgg

    I'm a bit worried about this, what toad poison are they on about? I do a fair amount of N,N-DMT which is the entry-level version of the toad-derived 5-MeO-DMT, having always thought it was physically harmless. Am I OK if I keep out of top level Russian politics?
    So are you licking toads to get high? Have heard of people doing that in US, but bit too rich for my tongue!
    No, I get N,N-DMT from the rootbark of the mimosa tree. Toad-licking is a serious thing, though, and is endangering the relevant species (Sonoran desert toad?).

    as with inventing glass or falconry, you have to ask how the fuck anyone ever thought it was a good idea in the first place.
  • Hey @Casino_Royale hope you are keeping well.
  • LDLFLDLF Posts: 144
    edited May 2022
    Here's hoping that Starmer has indeed 'played a blinder', which apparently requires his own resignation to be seen through in its entirety to maintain moral principle.
    I agree with those who pick out either Nandy or Reeves for Labour's first break from Salic law.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,758
    edited May 2022

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    I think we will find out lots about the immense contribution made by Queen Elizabeth II in the future.

    Like: she was almost singlehandedly responsible for the successful transition from the Empire to the Commonwealth and personally for preserving well over a dozen Commonwealth Realms into the 21st Century. She also gave a huge boost to the projection of British soft power on the European, US and global stage through the respect and admiration she commanded.

    Never let it be said that monarchs are 'just' figureheads.

    Given the number of places that clearly want to be Republics yet are holding off (apparently not presently willing to follow Barbados in this) there must be some personal element involved.

    Many things, people or actions are symbolic - but symbols have power.
    Do we know they want to be republics? Surely if they wanted it that much they would now be republics?

    Anyway, republics are shit and boring. You either have a political and divisive President (France /USA) or one that no-one ever hears about or knows (Ireland/Germany).

    Monarchs are better but there are rules you have to play by. They fall when their egos get the better of them, as ours would have done post WWII during the Attlee administration had Edward VIII not abdicated.
    Looking at the list of realms ruled by Glorious Britain, sorry, voluntary members of the regnal Commonwealth, they are:


    “Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.”

    Of those I’d say Oz, Jamaica and Belize are the most likely to go, first. But there is a question mark over all of them. For Oz it’s just an arse-ache - why bother if you are such a successful country, and this is source of stability? - for the other two it’s the opposite. Do you really need the extra INstability?

    I think it's only been me and you on here who've, consistently, argued for the monarchy. Perhaps backed by a handful of others.

    As you rightly said: most pb.com posters are number nerds who are somewhat on the spectrum and simply don't 'get' the powerful emotional reasonance and symbolism of the monarchy, nor why it's so valuable.
    When we're talking about matters of emotional resonance, the people disagreeing with you aren't "not getting it". They just disagree. But to imply that their subjective view is the result of a diagnosable condition is way off. Come on.
    Republicanism is heavily overrepresented on here compared to the population at large.

    That is the reason, together with some misplaced sense of intellectual superiority.
    Have you ever wondered if the support for the monarchy is in fact support QEII and that sad day when she passes on the support for the monarchy will evaporate?
    Even Charles now has a net favourable rating of +27%, William of +67%, almost the same as the Queen's +71%.

    The British monarchy has with the exception of the Protectorate lasted for a 1000 years in England, Scotland and then the UK with monarchs coming and going. The Queen has been a good one but her loss after a long reign will be no different to Victoria's after a long 64 year reign and then the Prince of Wales proved a better than expected monarch as Edward VIIth for his relatively short 9 year reign
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/12/02/public-opinion-prince-charles-improves-latest-roya
    There’s a strong argument when Liz, sadly, moves on that they should skip a generation to help make the monarchy more relevant to diverse, dynamic, modern Britain.

    King William.
    People have been saying that literally for decades, I don't think it is that strong of an argument at this point. A balding 40 year old may be closer to the average person in the country but is not that much more relevant. Especially as part of Will's appeal seems to be he is personally boring, like his grandmother - a steady hand.
    You can't skip a generation in an hereditary monarchy.Charles to abdicate in advance?
    Henry II and Henry VII both did.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    As an American I want to apologize for Megan Markle. She doesn't seem to be able to get along with anyone, except her poor husband. And I can't help wondering whether the person who introduced the two wasn't acting on a Russian (or Chinese) suggestion. Yes, that's improbable, but the chances that she would cause problems for the monarchy should have been obviously high.

    (What should Elizabeth and Charles have done? Well, this is hindsight, but I think they should have found a job for Harry in Scotland, and hope that some Scottish lass would be willing to sacrifice for her nation, by taking him on.)

    My long-standing proposal is for Harry to become monarch of Scots and his big brother monarch of England. On the pattern of the Norwegian/Danish deal post the successful Norwegian independence referendum. I have never had a single person support the idea.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.



    I'm sure Charles can go, being Duke of Edinburgh now.
    Duke of Rothesay.
    That one too, but he'd had that for 70 years, the Edinburgh one is shiny and new, to provide a reason to renew his relationship with the country etc etc.
    Hmm, already tried. The chap who insisted on flying to Scotland when he had covid ...
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,226
    edited May 2022
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Russian finance minister: GDP could fall 12% this year, due to sanctions.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/05/09/ftse-100-markets-live-news-russia-energy-mccolls/

    Not enough I have to say. I presume that is without an oil embargo and much of a move on gas supplies? Even if it takes a few years for the economic effects to be completely felt the important thing is for the elite to find themselves staring into the abyss.
    There can be no meaningful oil embargo because there are plenty of countries willing to buy Russian oil. Ditto coal exports.

    If the gas pipelines from Russia to Europe are severed (in one way or another), that would have a bigger impact, but it is worth remembering that (even before the recent rises in the oil price), gas exports were only about a sixth of oil exports - https://oec.world/en/profile/country/rus
    I know you’re a pro in this area but I know a few things too. There is a way to have a meaningful impact on Russian oil production, and it lies in not only an EU import ban but an EU shipping ban. Unfortunately the EU bottled it on that second step today only 6 days before it was due to come into effect, ostensibly at Greece’s request.

    As for demand, India is talking about 16m bbl [EXIT: a MONTH!] of Russian oil. Small potatoes from the 2.7m bbl a day Europe was using before the war (circa 2m now). And China, well the state owned companies aren’t entering into new contracts to buy Russian crude or refined products like jet fuel. The private sector is and the net result is that Chinese demand for Russian oil has remained roughly flat, albeit a higher share of the total given the falling demand overall due to lockdowns.

    There’s a further step I believe should be taken and that’s an import ban on third country refined products that have been refined from Russian crude or blended with Russian refined product. As soon as a third country turns it into something else, legally it ceases to be Russian. Impact is a) the free market would overcome the logistics difficulty to keep outsized share of Russian production going, b) it would be at the commercial detriment of the European refining sector, given Urals is said to trade at perhaps a $30 / bbl discount. India still gets cheaper energy but not at Europe’s expense.

    If you did all that, then you could perhaps halve Russian oil production, more or less wiping out the oil export industry save for what goes to China from further East. And this would be permanent, given the technical challenges with much of Russia’s production. Suspend a well and there’s a good chance it doesn’t ever come back on again.

    A cynic might suggest Europe knows all this and is still hedging its bets, hoping Putin goes quickly and the whole tedium of diversifying supply goes away with him. Fat chance in my view.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    edited May 2022

    As an American I want to apologize for Megan Markle. She doesn't seem to be able to get along with anyone, except her poor husband. And I can't help wondering whether the person who introduced the two wasn't acting on a Russian (or Chinese) suggestion. Yes, that's improbable, but the chances that she would cause problems for the monarchy should have been obviously high.

    (What should Elizabeth and Charles have done? Well, this is hindsight, but I think they should have found a job for Harry in Scotland, and hope that some Scottish lass would be willing to sacrifice for her nation, by taking him on.)

    My long-standing proposal is for Harry to become monarch of Scots and his big brother monarch of England. On the pattern of the Norwegian/Danish deal post the successful Norwegian independence referendum. I have never had a single person support the idea.
    I've long suspected that the PR is a sleeper agent slipped nto place by the Royal Family to take over the family business in Scotland come indy. Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Kirk, married in the Kirk not the C of E, and all that.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712

    Sean_F said:

    Republicans' biggest problem in this country is that they just seem weird and obssessive to most people.

    That's what they used to say about Brexiteers back in the day, when Alan Sked led UKIP.
    We were in the EEC/EU for 46 years, we have had a monarchy for over 1000 years except 10 years from 1649-1659
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    I think we will find out lots about the immense contribution made by Queen Elizabeth II in the future.

    Like: she was almost singlehandedly responsible for the successful transition from the Empire to the Commonwealth and personally for preserving well over a dozen Commonwealth Realms into the 21st Century. She also gave a huge boost to the projection of British soft power on the European, US and global stage through the respect and admiration she commanded.

    Never let it be said that monarchs are 'just' figureheads.

    Given the number of places that clearly want to be Republics yet are holding off (apparently not presently willing to follow Barbados in this) there must be some personal element involved.

    Many things, people or actions are symbolic - but symbols have power.
    Do we know they want to be republics? Surely if they wanted it that much they would now be republics?

    Anyway, republics are shit and boring. You either have a political and divisive President (France /USA) or one that no-one ever hears about or knows (Ireland/Germany).

    Monarchs are better but there are rules you have to play by. They fall when their egos get the better of them, as ours would have done post WWII during the Attlee administration had Edward VIII not abdicated.
    Looking at the list of realms ruled by Glorious Britain, sorry, voluntary members of the regnal Commonwealth, they are:


    “Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.”

    Of those I’d say Oz, Jamaica and Belize are the most likely to go, first. But there is a question mark over all of them. For Oz it’s just an arse-ache - why bother if you are such a successful country, and this is source of stability? - for the other two it’s the opposite. Do you really need the extra INstability?

    I think it's only been me and you on here who've, consistently, argued for the monarchy. Perhaps backed by a handful of others.

    As you rightly said: most pb.com posters are number nerds who are somewhat on the spectrum and simply don't 'get' the powerful emotional reasonance and symbolism of the monarchy, nor why it's so valuable.
    When we're talking about matters of emotional resonance, the people disagreeing with you aren't "not getting it". They just disagree. But to imply that their subjective view is the result of a diagnosable condition is way off. Come on.
    Republicanism is heavily overrepresented on here compared to the population at large.

    That is the reason, together with some misplaced sense of intellectual superiority.
    Have you ever wondered if the support for the monarchy is in fact support QEII and that sad day when she passes on the support for the monarchy will evaporate?
    Even Charles now has a net favourable rating of +27%, William of +67%, almost the same as the Queen's +71%.

    The British monarchy has with the exception of the Protectorate lasted for a 1000 years in England, Scotland and then the UK with monarchs coming and going. The Queen has been a good one but her loss after a long reign will be no different to Victoria's after a long 64 year reign and then the Prince of Wales proved a better than expected monarch as Edward VIIth for his relatively short 9 year reign
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/12/02/public-opinion-prince-charles-improves-latest-roya
    There’s a strong argument when Liz, sadly, moves on that they should skip a generation to help make the monarchy more relevant to diverse, dynamic, modern Britain.

    King William.
    People have been saying that literally for decades, I don't think it is that strong of an argument at this point. A balding 40 year old may be closer to the average person in the country but is not that much more relevant. Especially as part of Will's appeal seems to be he is personally boring, like his grandmother - a steady hand.
    You can't skip a generation in an hereditary monarchy.
    Takes a bit of effort, but people have managed to keep a monarchy young and fresh. We're probably not up for strangling people upon their majority though.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Sean_F said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Russian finance minister: GDP could fall 12% this year, due to sanctions.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/05/09/ftse-100-markets-live-news-russia-energy-mccolls/

    Not enough I have to say. I presume that is without an oil embargo and much of a move on gas supplies? Even if it takes a few years for the economic effects to be completely felt the important thing is for the elite to find themselves staring into the abyss.
    They made bank over the spring, as the Germans kept the oil and gas flowing at high prices. Next autumn is key, need to make sure there’s no European demand for Russian O&G exports - which will screw up their production as the storage gets full.
    It will make no difference to demand for Russian oil, because (while there's a shortage of LNG vessels), there are thousands of shitty old oil tankers than can be brought into service if day rates get high enough.

    All that will happen (and in fact is happening), is that Russia is getting $80-86/barrel from the Chinese and the Indians, while US/Nigerian/Middle Eastern producers are getting $100-110 from the democracies.
    Which is a cost.
    It is - but it has been more than outweighed by the fact that oil prices have increased so much.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,758

    As an American I want to apologize for Megan Markle. She doesn't seem to be able to get along with anyone, except her poor husband. And I can't help wondering whether the person who introduced the two wasn't acting on a Russian (or Chinese) suggestion. Yes, that's improbable, but the chances that she would cause problems for the monarchy should have been obviously high.

    (What should Elizabeth and Charles have done? Well, this is hindsight, but I think they should have found a job for Harry in Scotland, and hope that some Scottish lass would be willing to sacrifice for her nation, by taking him on.)

    My long-standing proposal is for Harry to become monarch of Scots and his big brother monarch of England. On the pattern of the Norwegian/Danish deal post the successful Norwegian independence referendum. I have never had a single person support the idea.
    But the monarch of Denmark wasn't the monarch of the United Kingdoms.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Former top manager of Lukoil and billionaire Alexander Subbotin has died after an anti-hangover session with a shaman. He experienced heart pain after using toad poison. The shaman didn’t call an ambulance but dripped Corvalol and put the billionaire to sleep in his basement.

    https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1523481012281364480?s=20&t=W0p5r9sg0FlQkKUFbjiOgg

    I'm a bit worried about this, what toad poison are they on about? I do a fair amount of N,N-DMT which is the entry-level version of the toad-derived 5-MeO-DMT, having always thought it was physically harmless. Am I OK if I keep out of top level Russian politics?
    My understanding is that conveyencing is a real hoot on DMT.
    Anything is a hoot on DMT. TMOT.

    Plus it only lasts 20 minutes so you can do it on a lunch break.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.

    The Northern Ireland Secretary has already ruled out granting a border poll and Unionist parties still won more seats than Nationalist parties at Stormont even if SF came first
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,151

    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.



    I'm sure Charles can go, being Duke of Edinburgh now.
    Duke of Rothesay.
    That one too, but he'd had that for 70 years, the Edinburgh one is shiny and new, to provide a reason to renew his relationship with the country etc etc.
    Merge the two titles and create a super new Scottish title like the Duke of Glasgae.
    Duke of Harthill, symbolising that magical point where East meets West in the central belt.
    I'm sure Rory Stewart would suggest Duke of the Middleland.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,841
    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    Erich von Daniken also had books published about ancient history. Dunno about TV, mind.
    Apparently he is still alive - and probably very happy about how much TV and movie material seems inspired by or influenced by his ideals. People love ancient astronaut theory.

    I remember Paul Merton joking about how the answer was always No to Erich's questions.

    Could this be a UFO from the 12th century? No

    Could this be a landing platform for an alien scacecraft? No

    Could this... "No, no no"
    He seems very happy when he's on Ancient Allens. Given the US are paying to study UAPs and have conceded one possibility is they are of non terrestrial origin then its no leap at all to their having been visiting since human records exist. The possibility of human interaction with aliens is somewhat beyond cheesy 'and finally' stories about stereotypical yokels in backwoods America now
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149

    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    kle4 said:

    Who sez that the younger royals are neither use nor ornament? Bit miffed that BJ & co think Scotland is so much in the bag that they don't need to send the duchess to live in Edinburgh.



    I'm sure Charles can go, being Duke of Edinburgh now.
    Duke of Rothesay.
    That one too, but he'd had that for 70 years, the Edinburgh one is shiny and new, to provide a reason to renew his relationship with the country etc etc.
    Merge the two titles and create a super new Scottish title like the Duke of Glasgae.
    Duke of Harthill, symbolising that magical point where East meets West in the central belt.
    I'm sure Rory Stewart would suggest Duke of the Middleland.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramids_(Bathgate)

    Complete with pink sheep.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    The former king of cambodia succeeded his grandfather, then later abdicated in favour of his own father. The became PM, later Chief of State and later became King again, whilst also directing 50 films (thanks wikipedia!).

    Sounds like an interesting dude.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    HYUFD said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    I think we will find out lots about the immense contribution made by Queen Elizabeth II in the future.

    Like: she was almost singlehandedly responsible for the successful transition from the Empire to the Commonwealth and personally for preserving well over a dozen Commonwealth Realms into the 21st Century. She also gave a huge boost to the projection of British soft power on the European, US and global stage through the respect and admiration she commanded.

    Never let it be said that monarchs are 'just' figureheads.

    Given the number of places that clearly want to be Republics yet are holding off (apparently not presently willing to follow Barbados in this) there must be some personal element involved.

    Many things, people or actions are symbolic - but symbols have power.
    Do we know they want to be republics? Surely if they wanted it that much they would now be republics?

    Anyway, republics are shit and boring. You either have a political and divisive President (France /USA) or one that no-one ever hears about or knows (Ireland/Germany).

    Monarchs are better but there are rules you have to play by. They fall when their egos get the better of them, as ours would have done post WWII during the Attlee administration had Edward VIII not abdicated.
    Looking at the list of realms ruled by Glorious Britain, sorry, voluntary members of the regnal Commonwealth, they are:


    “Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu.”

    Of those I’d say Oz, Jamaica and Belize are the most likely to go, first. But there is a question mark over all of them. For Oz it’s just an arse-ache - why bother if you are such a successful country, and this is source of stability? - for the other two it’s the opposite. Do you really need the extra INstability?

    I think it's only been me and you on here who've, consistently, argued for the monarchy. Perhaps backed by a handful of others.

    As you rightly said: most pb.com posters are number nerds who are somewhat on the spectrum and simply don't 'get' the powerful emotional reasonance and symbolism of the monarchy, nor why it's so valuable.
    When we're talking about matters of emotional resonance, the people disagreeing with you aren't "not getting it". They just disagree. But to imply that their subjective view is the result of a diagnosable condition is way off. Come on.
    Republicanism is heavily overrepresented on here compared to the population at large.

    That is the reason, together with some misplaced sense of intellectual superiority.
    Have you ever wondered if the support for the monarchy is in fact support QEII and that sad day when she passes on the support for the monarchy will evaporate?
    Even Charles now has a net favourable rating of +27%, William of +67%, almost the same as the Queen's +71%.

    The British monarchy has with the exception of the Protectorate lasted for a 1000 years in England, Scotland and then the UK with monarchs coming and going. The Queen has been a good one but her loss after a long reign will be no different to Victoria's after a long 64 year reign and then the Prince of Wales proved a better than expected monarch as Edward VIIth for his relatively short 9 year reign
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/12/02/public-opinion-prince-charles-improves-latest-roya
    There’s a strong argument when Liz, sadly, moves on that they should skip a generation to help make the monarchy more relevant to diverse, dynamic, modern Britain.

    King William.
    People have been saying that literally for decades, I don't think it is that strong of an argument at this point. A balding 40 year old may be closer to the average person in the country but is not that much more relevant. Especially as part of Will's appeal seems to be he is personally boring, like his grandmother - a steady hand.
    Skip straight to George. He’ll reach the age of majority in 7 years time in his northern kingdom.
    Is that a referendum generation, he's already 70 by Salmond standards, gag?

    Keen entrepreneur mind, already has his own clothing brand at Asda.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    IshmaelZ said:

    Sean_F said:

    Republicans' biggest problem in this country is that they just seem weird and obssessive to most people.

    Funny you should say that.


    :lol:

    I post that face iff I have genuinely laughed out loud. That is fucking extraordinary.
    Do you think they are licking them to get high, IshmaelZ style?
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,232
    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    I am on way back north, my meeting in the Bucks countryside being over (very close to Chequers as it happens), having driven down this morning. I am having the largest strongest coffee I can stomach and find that Sir Keir has laid down the gauntlet. Good for him!

    Those Covid lockdown rules are having a hell of an after-life.

    I assume nothing else has happened - like Putin declaring war on us or anything.

    I am currently listening to Mary Beard read her book "Twelve Caesars". I thought it would tell me about the Roman Emperors and what they did. But no. It's all about how they've been portrayed in art. At best it could have amounted to a 30 minute podcast. Instead of which it is endless chapter after endless chapter saying that

    1. Suetonius made up a lot of what he wrote.
    2. No-one really knows what Julius Caesar or others looked like.
    3. Artists made it up.
    4. Aristocrats liked having busts of them in their house.
    5. Er .... that's it.

    In TWELVE chapters. I don't think I've ever listened to anything so long and learned so little. In fact most of the time a I have no idea what she is talking about - it's like having a bath of warm words with occasional bubbles of names I recognise - Titian, Mantua, Charles 1st, Caligula etc.

    My admiration for my daughter who did a classics degree has increased significantly if this is what her lectures were like.

    That's a shame, as it's literally the next book on my reading pile (though I go in knowing it is about imagery).

    I could see a little of that party pooping tendency in her book SPQR, when talking about ancient battles and essentially going 'Things would have been far too chaotic for people to really know what was going on, so most of the detail we hear about, say, Cannae, is probably wrong' without really offering up any insight about that. I did enjoy the parts pointing out how the Roman foundational myths are really quite unusual in some ways (an unnecessary twin, outsides and outcasts founding the place etc)
    For those who have not seen it (and who care about the relative merits of Greece vs Rome) here is Mary Beard in a 90-minute debate against Boris Johnson.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2k448JqQyj8
    Doesn't seem like a fair fight, one the face of it. She generally knows what she's talking about.
    An academic expert in their field vs a former journalist and MP who did classics at univeristy 30 years before and likes it is presumably designed as an entertainment event not an even intellectual contest.

    But did he win?
    Johnson has also had books published about Rome and presented TV shows on the subject.

    Erich von Daniken also had books published about ancient history. Dunno about TV, mind.
    Apparently he is still alive - and probably very happy about how much TV and movie material seems inspired by or influenced by his ideals. People love ancient astronaut theory.

    I remember Paul Merton joking about how the answer was always No to Erich's questions.

    Could this be a UFO from the 12th century? No

    Could this be a landing platform for an alien scacecraft? No

    Could this... "No, no no"
    I remember hearing about an exchange in a carpark between von Daniken and a journalist he'd been debating with at some event or other. Roughly:

    Journalist: Why do you persist with this crap? It's obvious you don't really believe a word of it.

    Von Daniken: Let me give you a lift home in my Rolls Royce.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    If you've not not broken the law you've nothing to fear. https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1523758694739357697/photo/1

    In a long day at the Dual Thick Short Planks Congress this deserves at least a mentioned in dispatches
This discussion has been closed.