After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
You're very ignorant in your history.
You might want to look into what happened to the Tasmanian aboriginals. They were exterminated.
Most of them were killed by disease, again they were not executed in mass genocide and Nazi style extermination camps
"Most of them were killed by disease" what kind of excuse is that?
Some people died from disease. Those that didn't were systematically killed or rounded up and deported from the land.
That is as clear cut a case of genocide as it gets. The fact some died from disease doesn't explain, validate or justify what happened to the others.
That isn't genocide. Genocide is the intentional extermination of a people.
Tasmanian aboriginals either died from disease or were transported to islands.
That is not mass executions and gas chambers.
However no surprise a non Conservative like you sides with the far left in equating the British Empire to the Nazis
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
You're very ignorant in your history.
You might want to look into what happened to the Tasmanian aboriginals. They were exterminated.
Most of them were killed by disease, again they were not executed in mass genocide and Nazi style extermination camps
"Most of them were killed by disease" what kind of excuse is that?
Some people died from disease. Those that didn't were systematically killed or rounded up and deported from the land.
That is as clear cut a case of genocide as it gets. The fact some died from disease doesn't explain, validate or justify what happened to the others.
That isn't genocide. Genocide is the intentional extermination of a people.
Tasmanian aboriginals either died from disease or were transported to islands.
That is not mass executions and gas chambers.
However no surprise a non Conservative like you sides with the far left in equating the British Empire to the Nazis
WTF!? There's no reasoning with you.
Yes, what happened to the Tasmanian aborigines was a genocide.
No, I never equated the British Empire to the Nazis.
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
The slave trade produced hugely more misery for more people for a longer period than the holocaust. As far as motive is concerned is there a lot to choose between anti semitism and material greed? Why the attempt to frame this as a far left issue?
As it is part of the far left agenda you clearly support to equate the British Empire to the Nazis
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
I think the mortality rate on sugar plantations in the Eighteenth Century carribean can reasonably be compared to Nazi slave labour camps. Arrivals were worked to death in a few years.
The Boer War concentration camps were more like the Jewish ghettos in occupied Poland, death by overcrowding and disease, with no real attempt to ameliorate conditions.
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
The slave trade produced hugely more misery for more people for a longer period than the holocaust. As far as motive is concerned is there a lot to choose between anti semitism and material greed? Why the attempt to frame this as a far left issue?
Because the Left ONLY wants to talk about white slaving of black Africans
Why do they never talk about the Arabs that slaved white Europeans including Brits? Why, in particular, do they never talk about Muslim slavery of Africans, which went on longer and enslaved more people and was probably crueller than any other slave trade, and so, by your metric, is the greatest crime in history?
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
You're very ignorant in your history.
You might want to look into what happened to the Tasmanian aboriginals. They were exterminated.
Most of them were killed by disease, again they were not executed in mass genocide and Nazi style extermination camps
"Most of them were killed by disease" what kind of excuse is that?
Some people died from disease. Those that didn't were systematically killed or rounded up and deported from the land.
That is as clear cut a case of genocide as it gets. The fact some died from disease doesn't explain, validate or justify what happened to the others.
That isn't genocide. Genocide is the intentional extermination of a people.
Tasmanian aboriginals either died from disease or were transported to islands.
That is not mass executions and gas chambers.
However no surprise a non Conservative like you sides with the far left in equating the British Empire to the Nazis
WTF!? There's no reasoning with you.
Yes, what happened to the Tasmanian aborigines was a genocide.
No, I never equated the British Empire to the Nazis.
Yes, by default you did by butting into an argument equating the British Empire to the Nazis to call the treatment of Aboriginals in Tasmania a genocide. In comparison to the Nazis genocide of the Jews and others and extermination camps it was not comparable
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
Indeed: when the British abolished slavery in the parts of South Africa which they controlled (1833), the Boers set out on the Great Trek to found a state where they could continue to enslave people. The British then recognised Boer independence (Sand River Convention, 1852) on the explicit condition that "no slavery is or shall be permitted or practised in the country to the north of the Vaal River by the emigrant farmers". Which makes @IshmaelZ's apologia for the apartheid system (let alone actual Boer slavery) somewhat more bizarre than it was to begin with. However, critics of empire have always struggled with the Boer War, a war of conquest in which the British appear in many respects to be the less bad option as overlord.
The Boer War concentration camps were more like the Jewish ghettos in occupied Poland, death by overcrowding and disease, with no real attempt to ameliorate conditions.
In November 1901, the Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain ordered Alfred Milner to ensure that "all possible steps are being taken to reduce the rate of mortality". The civil authority took over the running of the camps from Kitchener and the British command and by February 1902 the annual death-rate in the concentration camps for white inmates dropped to 6.9 percent and eventually to 2 percent.
For the avoidance of doubt I’m not saying that the Irish hate us specifically. I’m saying everyone does. Just to make that clear.
Based on your own admittance of very limited travel? Hmm! There is undoubtedly a lot of prejudice in the world. I am delighted to let you know it is not quite as bad as you assume.
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
The slave trade produced hugely more misery for more people for a longer period than the holocaust. As far as motive is concerned is there a lot to choose between anti semitism and material greed? Why the attempt to frame this as a far left issue?
Because the Left ONLY wants to talk about white slaving of black Africans
Why do they never talk about the Arabs that slaved white Europeans including Brits? Why, in particular, do they never talk about Muslim slavery of Africans, which went on longer and enslaved more people and was probably crueller than any other slave trade, and so, by your metric, is the greatest crime in history?
Because they have an ideological loathing of the West and the US, UK and Israel in particular.
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
The slave trade produced hugely more misery for more people for a longer period than the holocaust. As far as motive is concerned is there a lot to choose between anti semitism and material greed? Why the attempt to frame this as a far left issue?
As it is part of the far left agenda you clearly support to equate the British Empire to the Nazis
Have you and Mr Seal been drinking together today?
I don't think that exhibiting ones stereotypes about Irish-Americans is a particularly convincing method of argument for disputing that groups of people might hold stereotyped views of the English.
For what it's worth the Irish-American branch of my in-laws do not fit that stereotype either.
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
That was part of the problem. My wife’s aunt had found out that, somewhat unexpectedly, one of those 23 and Me DNA tests had said my Mum, who’s pretty stereotypically English, was 85% Irish or something. I don’t hold with the accuracy of these things but my in laws took it strangely badly. If Irish people get upset by something so trivial as a postal DNA test then is there hope? I gave up after that,
So one person had an attitude over one thing, and therefore all Irish people are the same based upon that experience?
I think there's a word for that.
As I said, it was indicative of a global attitude, the person in question identifying with countries on two continents
So you're judging the globe, based upon one person?
So basically, if you're being racist here today, then everyone on the planet is racist, because you are?
People are individuals, not their compatriots. If one person is a dick, then they're a dick, not their compatriots. If everyone thinks you're a dick, try not being such a dick.
Clearly, in the anecdote I outline above, it was not me but my mother who was the problem, and she was 3500 miles away at the time. The only reason for it was that she was English.
Or the reason for it is because they don't like your mother for a personal reason? Or because the other person involved is a dick and it has nothing to do with the Irish, or the English?
One anecdote does not equal a nation. Why are you being so unabashedly racist as to say "they're all the same"?
One travels, gets a view of places, comes home. We deserve to be hated but hated we are. Not just in Ireland.
If we are generalising from one to many, are they all like you in Kent?
Pretty much
That is true actually. They should build a wall somewhere in Bexley to keep them out of London.
No plans for the Conservative Party to suspend Chris Pincher's party membership while investigations are ongoing, I understand. He has lost the party whip but is still a Tory member, as CCHQ haven't received any formal complaints about him. https://twitter.com/ionewells/status/1543983616639778817
Isn't Johnson a serial bottom and thigh toucher? Wouldn't it be hypocritical if he made a fuss about Pincher?
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I haven’t travelled to every country, but I’ve never encountered any hatred of the English in any country I’ve travelled to. That include Ireland, India, Nepal & China.
Unless the rude Parisian waiter counts. But he was being rude to my wife, who is Quechua and very much looks it, so…..
Raylan Givens : You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
The slave trade produced hugely more misery for more people for a longer period than the holocaust. As far as motive is concerned is there a lot to choose between anti semitism and material greed? Why the attempt to frame this as a far left issue?
As it is part of the far left agenda you clearly support to equate the British Empire to the Nazis
Have you and Mr Seal been drinking together today?
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
That was part of the problem. My wife’s aunt had found out that, somewhat unexpectedly, one of those 23 and Me DNA tests had said my Mum, who’s pretty stereotypically English, was 85% Irish or something. I don’t hold with the accuracy of these things but my in laws took it strangely badly. If Irish people get upset by something so trivial as a postal DNA test then is there hope? I gave up after that,
So one person had an attitude over one thing, and therefore all Irish people are the same based upon that experience?
I think there's a word for that.
As I said, it was indicative of a global attitude, the person in question identifying with countries on two continents
So you're judging the globe, based upon one person?
So basically, if you're being racist here today, then everyone on the planet is racist, because you are?
People are individuals, not their compatriots. If one person is a dick, then they're a dick, not their compatriots. If everyone thinks you're a dick, try not being such a dick.
Clearly, in the anecdote I outline above, it was not me but my mother who was the problem, and she was 3500 miles away at the time. The only reason for it was that she was English.
Or the reason for it is because they don't like your mother for a personal reason? Or because the other person involved is a dick and it has nothing to do with the Irish, or the English?
One anecdote does not equal a nation. Why are you being so unabashedly racist as to say "they're all the same"?
One travels, gets a view of places, comes home. We deserve to be hated but hated we are. Not just in Ireland.
If we are generalising from one to many, are they all like you in Kent?
Pretty much
I shall stay away from the place in that case, which should not be too hard as I have only been there once and that was on the M25
No plans for the Conservative Party to suspend Chris Pincher's party membership while investigations are ongoing, I understand. He has lost the party whip but is still a Tory member, as CCHQ haven't received any formal complaints about him. https://twitter.com/ionewells/status/1543983616639778817
Isn't Johnson a serial bottom and thigh toucher? Wouldn't it be hypocritical if he made a fuss about Pincher?
NSIT was some female colleague's description of him, was it not!
I haven’t travelled to every country, but I’ve never encountered any hatred of the English in any country I’ve travelled to. That include Ireland, India, Nepal & China.
Unless the rude Parisian waiter counts. But he was being rude to my wife, who is Quechua and very much looks it, so…..
Raylan Givens : You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.
It doesn't necessarily mean you are an arsehole; it could just be a practised belief that people are arseholes - that would do it.
Lots of imperial people's really wanted self-government under the British Crown, and that includes Gandhi (originally) and Hong Kongers, just as we gave to the "white" dominions at the turn of the century.
That's where the opportunity was lost.
Yes but the white dominions are still now independent too
But, with less hangups and a better and more constructive relationship with the UK.
And some still have the Queen too, of course.
They only still have the Queen because she is white like most of them are and of British ancestral origin
Because of what I said in my original post. It's not post ergo propter hoc.
Never come across that Latin phrase before. I had to look it up. Having looked it up I note you are trying to teach hyufd logic. You are flogging a dead horse.
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
That was part of the problem. My wife’s aunt had found out that, somewhat unexpectedly, one of those 23 and Me DNA tests had said my Mum, who’s pretty stereotypically English, was 85% Irish or something. I don’t hold with the accuracy of these things but my in laws took it strangely badly. If Irish people get upset by something so trivial as a postal DNA test then is there hope? I gave up after that,
So one person had an attitude over one thing, and therefore all Irish people are the same based upon that experience?
I think there's a word for that.
As I said, it was indicative of a global attitude, the person in question identifying with countries on two continents
So you're judging the globe, based upon one person?
So basically, if you're being racist here today, then everyone on the planet is racist, because you are?
People are individuals, not their compatriots. If one person is a dick, then they're a dick, not their compatriots. If everyone thinks you're a dick, try not being such a dick.
Clearly, in the anecdote I outline above, it was not me but my mother who was the problem, and she was 3500 miles away at the time. The only reason for it was that she was English.
Or the reason for it is because they don't like your mother for a personal reason? Or because the other person involved is a dick and it has nothing to do with the Irish, or the English?
One anecdote does not equal a nation. Why are you being so unabashedly racist as to say "they're all the same"?
One travels, gets a view of places, comes home. We deserve to be hated but hated we are. Not just in Ireland.
If we are generalising from one to many, are they all like you in Kent?
Pretty much
I shall stay away from the place in that case, which should not be too hard as I have only been there once and that was on the M25
Sorry you feel that way. Whitstable’s nice, off season, if you ever change your mind.
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
I don't think that exhibiting ones stereotypes about Irish-Americans is a particularly convincing method of argument for disputing that groups of people might hold stereotyped views of the English.
For what it's worth the Irish-American branch of my in-laws do not fit that stereotype either.
Most Irish Americans have only a dim and distant understanding of things Irish.
The time I encountered a real actual Northern Irish exile in a Irish bar in New Orleans springs to mind. He’d drunk there for years, apparently, without them noticing that he was actually a hardcore Loyalist - he went there because he missed home….
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Most people do hate me to be fair. I know I’m not a very likeable person sadly.
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
I have heard some historians claim it was the Scots, and to a lesser degree the Irish, that built the Empire and the English aristocracy that ran it into the ground (having the right ancestors became more important than having ability).
In Sri Lanka a lot of the tea estates have Scottish names because they were build and run by Scots. When slavery was abolished in the British empire Scotland had a disproportionately large number of owners to be compensated, too. The Scottish education system provided an oversupply of skilled professionals in areas like medicine, engineering and the law who went out to run the Empire. The Scots were highly enthusiastic imperialists, no less so than the English.
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Most people do hate me to be fair. I know I’m not a very likeable person sadly.
Well with that attitude, they will continue to do so, or at least, seem to you as if they do.
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Most people do hate me to be fair. I know I’m not a very likeable person sadly.
Well with that attitude, they will continue to do so, or at least, seem to you as if they do.
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
You're very ignorant in your history.
You might want to look into what happened to the Tasmanian aboriginals. They were exterminated.
Most of them were killed by disease, again they were not executed in mass genocide and Nazi style extermination camps
"Most of them were killed by disease" what kind of excuse is that?
Some people died from disease. Those that didn't were systematically killed or rounded up and deported from the land.
That is as clear cut a case of genocide as it gets. The fact some died from disease doesn't explain, validate or justify what happened to the others.
That isn't genocide. Genocide is the intentional extermination of a people.
Tasmanian aboriginals either died from disease or were transported to islands.
That is not mass executions and gas chambers.
However no surprise a non Conservative like you sides with the far left in equating the British Empire to the Nazis
WTF!? There's no reasoning with you.
Yes, what happened to the Tasmanian aborigines was a genocide.
No, I never equated the British Empire to the Nazis.
Really not sure Tasmania was a genocide. You need to read more
It is better phrased as a horrible, and cruelly one sided war, with atrocities by all combatants. The most severe barbarities on the white side - and they were grim indeed - came from transported prisoner-settlers (often the worst sort of men). The British state, if it did anything, tried to calm things down (and failed quite badly)
So a black mark against the British Empire, but no, not Nazi Germany
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Giving him the benefit of the doubt. Normally his posts are quite well balanced. I think he must have found himself an Irish-American leprechaun who offered him a wish of an unlimited supply of alcohol with the caveat that it would expire at the end of 4th July 2022
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
The slave trade produced hugely more misery for more people for a longer period than the holocaust. As far as motive is concerned is there a lot to choose between anti semitism and material greed? Why the attempt to frame this as a far left issue?
As it is part of the far left agenda you clearly support to equate the British Empire to the Nazis
Have you and Mr Seal been drinking together today?
@DougSeal ”I have made the most ridiculous statements on PB today.” @HYUFD ”Hold my beer.”
I don't think that exhibiting ones stereotypes about Irish-Americans is a particularly convincing method of argument for disputing that groups of people might hold stereotyped views of the English.
For what it's worth the Irish-American branch of my in-laws do not fit that stereotype either.
Most Irish Americans have only a dim and distant understanding of things Irish.
The time I encountered a real actual Northern Irish exile in a Irish bar in New Orleans springs to mind. He’d drunk there for years, apparently, without them noticing that he was actually a hardcore Loyalist - he went there because he missed home….
Must've been the bar I went into; they were collecting for the 'boys behind the wire'!
I don't think that exhibiting ones stereotypes about Irish-Americans is a particularly convincing method of argument for disputing that groups of people might hold stereotyped views of the English.
For what it's worth the Irish-American branch of my in-laws do not fit that stereotype either.
Most Irish Americans have only a dim and distant understanding of things Irish.
The time I encountered a real actual Northern Irish exile in a Irish bar in New Orleans springs to mind. He’d drunk there for years, apparently, without them noticing that he was actually a hardcore Loyalist - he went there because he missed home….
Must've been the bar I went into; they were collecting for the 'boys behind the wire'!
(It was a few years ago to be fair!)
I am old enough to remember that being sung in Kilburn pubs. As they sold An Phoblacht
In Kilburn now they are more likely to sell you sweetbread bruschetta, or stab you
I haven’t travelled to every country, but I’ve never encountered any hatred of the English in any country I’ve travelled to. That include Ireland, India, Nepal & China.
Unless the rude Parisian waiter counts. But he was being rude to my wife, who is Quechua and very much looks it, so…..
Raylan Givens : You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.
It doesn't necessarily mean you are an arsehole; it could just be a practised belief that people are arseholes - that would do it.
It all sounds like really hard work. Why not just assume that people are… people?… as default.
That and offering to buy the first round seems to make people happy to see you….
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Most people do hate me to be fair. I know I’m not a very likeable person sadly.
Well that 'commitment' from the fat liar lasted about five minutes. "Boris Johnson fails to give MPs commitment defence spending will rise to 2.5% of GDP by end of decade"
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Most people do hate me to be fair. I know I’m not a very likeable person sadly.
I don't hate you Doug. Have another glass!
You would if you met me IRL! Thanks, but I don’t drink Sunday - Wednesday inclusive…
I haven’t travelled to every country, but I’ve never encountered any hatred of the English in any country I’ve travelled to. That include Ireland, India, Nepal & China.
Unless the rude Parisian waiter counts. But he was being rude to my wife, who is Quechua and very much looks it, so…..
Raylan Givens : You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.
It doesn't necessarily mean you are an arsehole; it could just be a practised belief that people are arseholes - that would do it.
It all sounds like really hard work. Why not just assume that people are… people?… as default.
That and offering to buy the first round seems to make people happy to see you….
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Most people do hate me to be fair. I know I’m not a very likeable person sadly.
I don't hate you Doug. Have another glass!
You would if you met me IRL! Thanks, but I don’t drink Sunday - Wednesday inclusive…
We all have off days when we just talk shit for hours. Chillax
I haven’t travelled to every country, but I’ve never encountered any hatred of the English in any country I’ve travelled to. That include Ireland, India, Nepal & China.
Unless the rude Parisian waiter counts. But he was being rude to my wife, who is Quechua and very much looks it, so…..
Raylan Givens : You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.
It doesn't necessarily mean you are an arsehole; it could just be a practised belief that people are arseholes - that would do it.
It all sounds like really hard work. Why not just assume that people are… people?… as default.
That and offering to buy the first round seems to make people happy to see you….
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Most people do hate me to be fair. I know I’m not a very likeable person sadly.
I don't hate you Doug. Have another glass!
You would if you met me IRL! Thanks, but I don’t drink Sunday - Wednesday inclusive…
Well I have and I don't, I thought you were a seriously nice bloke, so cheer the fuck up.
I haven’t travelled to every country, but I’ve never encountered any hatred of the English in any country I’ve travelled to. That include Ireland, India, Nepal & China.
Unless the rude Parisian waiter counts. But he was being rude to my wife, who is Quechua and very much looks it, so…..
Raylan Givens : You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.
It doesn't necessarily mean you are an arsehole; it could just be a practised belief that people are arseholes - that would do it.
It all sounds like really hard work. Why not just assume that people are… people?… as default.
That and offering to buy the first round seems to make people happy to see you….
Buying the first round has another advantage of course. It's usually the only round anyone can remember who paid for it by the end of the evening.
I'm Irish and I do not hate you. There are lots of English people on here and I do not hate any of them.
The Irish Times appears to think you might be an exception.
That is an opinion piece mainly about sport, not a peer-reviewed piece of social research. If you base your worries on "facts" like that it is no wonder that you think we are out to get you.
You are more likely to get anti-English sentiment in Belfast (part of the UK for now) in areas like Turf Lodge or the Falls Road
My mother is a loving grandmother to two Irish grandkids. Looks after them one days a week. Yet my Irish-American aunt in law accused her of being anti-Irish. That’s the sort of fact I rely upon, an instinctive, reflexive Anglophobia despite evidence to the contrary,.
But she is American. Many "Irish Americans" do not even know where Ireland is. Clinton claimed to be "Irish American" and he was the first in 7 generations to revisit The Oul Sod and set foot on it. I would say her attitudes are what she thinks are Irish but if she turned up anywhere in Ireland and started passing that attitude out, I do not think she would get very far...
She’s been there a number of times and consumes the Irish American press. Irish Americans are just “Irish”: as they put it themselves. She’s opened my eyes about relations between these islands.
There is nothing "Irish" about Irish-Americanism, it is just a wanna-be attitude and much of it is wrong.
Many "Irish-Americans" probably have less Irish blood than many English people
Very many Irish-Americans are actually descended from Scots-Irish. Protestants. The people that repressed the Catholics
They tend to overlook that
Well indeed. There is a certain poster on here who seems somewhat lacking in education (normally I would be sympathetic except that he is a complete twat) and he refers to Scotland being a colony when the historic reality is that Scotland was one of the most enthusiastic parts of the UK when it came to providing colonialists to repress not just the Irish but many other folk around the world. ( I now await the torrent of abuse from the inarticulate little a-hole)
Indeed colonialism is rather complex. My Scottish ancestors were cleared off their ancestral lands in the clearances, then went out in coffin ships to Australia to settle on lands cleared of aborigines. Victims or perpetrators of colonialism? The honest answer is both.
Yes except that I think you may find that the clearances were mainly carried out by the Scottish Nobility. Not therefore due to colonialism, just good old fashioned feudal hierarchy.
I was about to say the same and then decided I wouldn't don my waders and go into such dangerous waters.
I am half Irish. My stereotype is that I am always up for a punch-up (well verbal anyway). The average intellect of the Scots Nats on here rarely give me cause for concern, so it gives me pleasure to correct their fake news history.
Interesting. Do you feel a strong and unaccountable loathing for Doug Seal?
Most people do hate me to be fair. I know I’m not a very likeable person sadly.
I don't hate you Doug. Have another glass!
You would if you met me IRL! Thanks, but I don’t drink Sunday - Wednesday inclusive…
Well if I could, Id buy you one on Thursday. I must also compliment you on having the nicest picture on here.
HYUFD said: "The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire"
Depends on which part of the United States you are talking about: Examples: 1777 "The Constitution of the Vermont Republic partially bans slavery,[64] freeing men over 21 and women older than 18 at the time of its passage.[65] The ban is not strongly enforced." 1783 "Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed." 1787 "The United States in Congress Assembled passes the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, outlawing any new slavery in the Northwest Territories." (The area covered by the ordinance became Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.) source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_abolition_of_slavery_and_serfdom (That timeline deserves study, even though it omits the Gulag and the similar camps in Communist China.)
In other northern states, prior to the Civil War, slavery was often banned gradually, but it was banned in all of them long before the war.
I haven’t travelled to every country, but I’ve never encountered any hatred of the English in any country I’ve travelled to. That include Ireland, India, Nepal & China.
Unless the rude Parisian waiter counts. But he was being rude to my wife, who is Quechua and very much looks it, so…..
Raylan Givens : You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.
It doesn't necessarily mean you are an arsehole; it could just be a practised belief that people are arseholes - that would do it.
It all sounds like really hard work. Why not just assume that people are… people?… as default.
That and offering to buy the first round seems to make people happy to see you….
At least 25 shots were fired at an Illinois Fourth of July parade; a reporter saw five people bloodied: “As parade-goers fled the parade route in Highland Park, they left behind chairs, baby strollers and blankets.” https://mobile.twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1543985129818689536
At least 25 shots were fired at an Illinois Fourth of July parade; a reporter saw five people bloodied: “As parade-goers fled the parade route in Highland Park, they left behind chairs, baby strollers and blankets.” https://mobile.twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1543985129818689536
At least 25 shots were fired at an Illinois Fourth of July parade; a reporter saw five people bloodied: “As parade-goers fled the parade route in Highland Park, they left behind chairs, baby strollers and blankets.” https://mobile.twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1543985129818689536
After Labour's capitulation on Brexit NOT having Boris Johnson is Labour's only remaining USP.
It’s not a capitulation, Roger, it’s reality. The EU are not letting us back. Labour can only repair relations. Johnson reinforced the pre-existing Anglophobia in the EU and turned it into a loathing that can never heal. It’s over. We can’t go back after pissing on the doormat on the way out. It’s sad but it’s the reality.
FOM and a single market on the other should be an imperative.
Labour are all over the place. Useless!
FOM would be a hostage to fortune - the squeeze on low end employee availability will eventually ease, as business adapt. If that coincides with an FOM deal, then the two will be linked inextricably.
The removal of FOM is why we have no HGV drivers, not enough educated blue collar workers, and shortages in care and health services, let alone the fact that we can't up-sticks and live unfettered in Spain or the South of France like we could before we lost that right.
I am not demanding re-join, but this policy is absurd. It is pandering to the terminally stupid.
It takes two to tango. Why do you think an SM option is open to us? We are not rejoining the SM - we can’t. We are too hated, too despised elsewhere in Europe. We are not trusted is an understatement. It’s over. I’m sad about it but we’re not going to be allowed back.
The EU don't trust Johnson, with good reason, but I think would be much more open to negotiating a closer relationship with a different PM who approached the negotiations in a cooperative and honest spirit. I think they would be overjoyed if we rejoined , what better way to demonstrate the attractiveness of EU membership than to welcome us back into the fold, but they would want to see a stable pro-EU majority in place first as there is no appetite to go through this time-wasting shitshow again.
He’s made it worse deeper than Johnson. It’s a dislike and distrust of the English nation. They hate us with a passion. That’s why they’re so keen on getting the Scots in. Always have to an extent but Johnson’s given them the opportunity to express it openly.
What is your evidence for this assertion? I interact fairly regularly with current and former EU officials and most are Anglophiles, whose overwhelming emotional response to Brexit has been sadness, coupled with irritation that the UK government is trying to renegotiate its own deal and is once again using up bandwidth when there are more serious things to focus on. They do have a genuine loathing for Johnson for being so dishonest, but then that has also become the settled view on this side of the channel too.
Interaction with current and former EU officials, current politicians and EU citizens. There is a visceral shiver when an English person enters the room. Largely due to Johnson bringing it to the fore
Is there anyone in your view who doesn't harbour a visceral hatred of the English? Or have you become the Millwall of Europe?
Most countries hate us. Al Murray did a series on it.
In my experience most countries hate the English a lot less than you might think they would have reason to. I would put Ireland, India and the countries of the Anglophone Caribbean at the top of this list of cutting the English a lot more slack than they probably deserve.
Indian TV and film routinely depicts the English the way Anglophone media depicts WW2 Germans. Either bungling or irredeemably evil.
This has noticeably intensified with rise of Modi/BJP.
Modern, or for that period? Because for the colonial period, the British occupation of the Indian sub continent is definitely comparable to the horrors of Nazi rule- in body count, political oppression, economic destruction etc. The UK only ignore it because we view ourselves as the good guys in WW2 and we killed people at a slower pace compared to the death camps. Inglorious Empire is a highly enlightening read to understand what the Empire did to the continent.
Not that Modi has any moral high ground.
What a load of rubbish. British rule in India was not perfect but in no way whatsoever was it comparable to the Nazis and Holocaust.
There was no mass genocide of Indians, no extermination camps for Hindus
Quite
The slur on Our Empire suggesting that it treated Indians as if they were a lot of Africans is intolerable
HYUFD is quite right on one detail, the extermination camps were for Christians. But in Africa (Southern). ,Vide the "concentration camp" (c) British Empire, 2nd Boer War. [Edit] We'd call it an internment camp today. Shocking, and if not intentional then hardly unsurprising, mortality throigh overcrowding, disease and bad food.
There were no extermination camps in South Africa and of course the Boers themselves introduced Apartheid
They were de facto extermination campus in many cases.
It's a bit rich after shipping 3m black people across the Atlantic and working them to death, to point the finger at people who made them travel in separate buses.
No they weren't, where were the gas chambers in South Africa?
The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire
If you cause someone to die you are exterminating them. Why the requirement for gas chambers
US slavery was a UK legacy. For the others so what? When did "other people do it" ever justify anything?
Extermination is a conscious act of murder and requires mass executions.
We were dealing with the usual far left rant that the British Empire was equivalent to the Nazis. Which was patently untrue.
As for slavery it is certainly true Britain abolished slavery well before most Empires
The slave trade produced hugely more misery for more people for a longer period than the holocaust. As far as motive is concerned is there a lot to choose between anti semitism and material greed? Why the attempt to frame this as a far left issue?
Because the Left ONLY wants to talk about white slaving of black Africans
Why do they never talk about the Arabs that slaved white Europeans including Brits? Why, in particular, do they never talk about Muslim slavery of Africans, which went on longer and enslaved more people and was probably crueller than any other slave trade, and so, by your metric, is the greatest crime in history?
Don't know nothing about Ay-rabs, and not interested in allocating guilt. What I am actively interested in is denialism, esp denialism from my own side, including the sort of implied denialism which says that the Empire was *basically* A Force For Good, with trivial flaws. It was first and foremost a slave trading and slave exploiting empire, with add ons. If you look at the numbers, slaving and allied trades peaked at 12% of GDP which was basically *all* GDP which wasn't agriculture.
And this needs saying because it is true and is denied, and you don't get reconciliation without truth. I think CRT is bollocks but I can see why you would advance it in the face of huge denial of the enormous wrong done to your ancestors.
At least 25 shots were fired at an Illinois Fourth of July parade; a reporter saw five people bloodied: “As parade-goers fled the parade route in Highland Park, they left behind chairs, baby strollers and blankets.” https://mobile.twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1543985129818689536
HYUFD said: "The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire"
Depends on which part of the United States you are talking about: Examples: 1777 "The Constitution of the Vermont Republic partially bans slavery,[64] freeing men over 21 and women older than 18 at the time of its passage.[65] The ban is not strongly enforced." 1783 "Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed." 1787 "The United States in Congress Assembled passes the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, outlawing any new slavery in the Northwest Territories." (The area covered by the ordinance became Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.) source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_abolition_of_slavery_and_serfdom (That timeline deserves study, even though it omits the Gulag and the similar camps in Communist China.)
In other northern states, prior to the Civil War, slavery was often banned gradually, but it was banned in all of them long before the war.
Slavery continued in the South and border states of the USA until 1865, long after the British Empire had abolished slavery
HYUFD said: "The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire"
Depends on which part of the United States you are talking about: Examples: 1777 "The Constitution of the Vermont Republic partially bans slavery,[64] freeing men over 21 and women older than 18 at the time of its passage.[65] The ban is not strongly enforced." 1783 "Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed." 1787 "The United States in Congress Assembled passes the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, outlawing any new slavery in the Northwest Territories." (The area covered by the ordinance became Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.) source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_abolition_of_slavery_and_serfdom (That timeline deserves study, even though it omits the Gulag and the similar camps in Communist China.)
In other northern states, prior to the Civil War, slavery was often banned gradually, but it was banned in all of them long before the war.
Slavery continued in the South and border states of the USA until 1865, long after the British Empire had abolished slavery
And was abolished in many others long before. That's his point. Continual whataboutery concerning slavery is tiring. It was wrong. No matter what anyone else was doing.
Surprise. "No 10 refuses to deny PM referred to disgraced MP as 'Pincher by name, pincher by nature' before making him deputy chief whip"
He probably repeated it numerous times thinking it jolly witty.
It does make you think all this is already baked into the public's opinion of Johnson but hopefully his mps will do the right thing and send him on his way
If Lab are only 6% ahead overall they're decidedly unlikely to win a by-election in Pincher's seat.
The key figure here, i think, is the 35. If the Tories are North of 35 in a GE, Labour will, at best, have a messy minority. Seems outlierish though with a low LabGrLD for Redfield and a much higher ConRef than lately. SNP also too low (as they are in the subsample)
HYUFD said: "The US, Spain, France, the Arabs etc all continued slavery long after the UK and British Empire"
Depends on which part of the United States you are talking about: Examples: 1777 "The Constitution of the Vermont Republic partially bans slavery,[64] freeing men over 21 and women older than 18 at the time of its passage.[65] The ban is not strongly enforced." 1783 "Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed." 1787 "The United States in Congress Assembled passes the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, outlawing any new slavery in the Northwest Territories." (The area covered by the ordinance became Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.) source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_abolition_of_slavery_and_serfdom (That timeline deserves study, even though it omits the Gulag and the similar camps in Communist China.)
In other northern states, prior to the Civil War, slavery was often banned gradually, but it was banned in all of them long before the war.
Slavery continued in the South and border states of the USA until 1865, long after the British Empire had abolished slavery
Surprise. "No 10 refuses to deny PM referred to disgraced MP as 'Pincher by name, pincher by nature' before making him deputy chief whip"
He probably repeated it numerous times thinking it jolly witty.
It does make you think all this is already baked into the public's opinion of Johnson but hopefully his mps will do the right thing and send him on his way
It's the hope that kills you, you know. There's no evidence they will as yet.
On a personal note today was the day my 82 year old wife sold her car, following confirmation from her surgeon that her right shoulder was shot and she needs a complete new one
It was decided the operation, and especially the lengthy recovery period and physio was not for her and she is to live with restrictive movement
This is the first time since we had our children that she has not had her own car and independence, but she is just so pragmatic and realistic
We have so much to be grateful for and indeed grandchild number 5 due on the 1st September
And I am delighted to be her own personal chauffeur from now on
History Guy - July 4, 1826 (Death of John Adams & Thomas Jefferson) On the fiftieth anniversary of the ratification of the Declaration of Independence, the US lost two of the men most responsible for its creation. Independence Day 1826 might be the most important since July 4, 1776.
On a personal note today was the day my 82 year old wife sold her car, following confirmation from her surgeon that her right shoulder was shot and she needs a complete new one
It was decided the operation, and especially the lengthy recovery period and physio was not for her and she is to live with restrictive movement
This is the first time since we had our children that she has not had her own car and independence, but she is just so pragmatic and realistic
We have so much to be grateful for and indeed grandchild number 5 due on the 1st September
And I am delighted to be her own personal chauffeur from now on
Well done her on a hard decision, and well done you for stepping up to the role of chauffeur.
Surprise. "No 10 refuses to deny PM referred to disgraced MP as 'Pincher by name, pincher by nature' before making him deputy chief whip"
He probably repeated it numerous times thinking it jolly witty.
It does make you think all this is already baked into the public's opinion of Johnson but hopefully his mps will do the right thing and send him on his way
It's the hope that kills you, you know. There's no evidence they will as yet.
Our own Aaron Bell is leading the charge for the 1922 later this month., and he has my 100% support in his desire to see the back of Johnson
That Starmer interview with Peston is pathetic. He can't say how he would fix all of the problems of the Boris Brexit Deal because he refuses to point to the problems and say "these are the problems".
Instead its "we're looking forwards not backwards". Great! But ignoring the twin elephants in the room (our lack of a free trade deal hanks to having no customs or single market deals) just makes his position nothing but hot air.
On a personal note today was the day my 82 year old wife sold her car, following confirmation from her surgeon that her right shoulder was shot and she needs a complete new one
It was decided the operation, and especially the lengthy recovery period and physio was not for her and she is to live with restrictive movement
This is the first time since we had our children that she has not had her own car and independence, but she is just so pragmatic and realistic
We have so much to be grateful for and indeed grandchild number 5 due on the 1st September
And I am delighted to be her own personal chauffeur from now on
Am sorry for Mrs Big, glad you can take up the slack. Best of luck for you & yours!
Haven't had a car for some time now, and still miss it.
Comments
Tasmanian aboriginals either died from disease or were transported to islands.
That is not mass executions and gas chambers.
However no surprise a non Conservative like you sides with the far left in equating the British Empire to the Nazis
Yes, what happened to the Tasmanian aborigines was a genocide.
No, I never equated the British Empire to the Nazis.
The Boer War concentration camps were more like the Jewish ghettos in occupied Poland, death by overcrowding and disease, with no real attempt to ameliorate conditions.
Why do they never talk about the Arabs that slaved white Europeans including Brits? Why, in particular, do they never talk about Muslim slavery of Africans, which went on longer and enslaved more people and was probably crueller than any other slave trade, and so, by your metric, is the greatest crime in history?
In November 1901, the Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain ordered Alfred Milner to ensure that "all possible steps are being taken to reduce the rate of mortality". The civil authority took over the running of the camps from Kitchener and the British command and by February 1902 the annual death-rate in the concentration camps for white inmates dropped to 6.9 percent and eventually to 2 percent.
It is just an extension of the culture wars
For what it's worth the Irish-American branch of my in-laws do not fit that stereotype either.
Unless the rude Parisian waiter counts. But he was being rude to my wife, who is Quechua and very much looks it, so…..
Raylan Givens : You run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. You run into assholes all day, you're the asshole.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/cabinet-office-leaked-survey-unhappy-civil-servants
The time I encountered a real actual Northern Irish exile in a Irish bar in New Orleans springs to mind. He’d drunk there for years, apparently, without them noticing that he was actually a hardcore Loyalist - he went there because he missed home….
Labour 41% (+1)
Conservative 35% (+3)
Liberal Democrat 11% (-2)
Green 5% (–)
Scottish National Party 3% (-2)
Reform UK 5% (+2)
Other 1% (-1)
Changes +/- 29-30 June
https://t.co/NoW9OnJ94Y https://t.co/Lgx52rxNsM
Sex pest bounce
Edit - since March
It is better phrased as a horrible, and cruelly one sided war, with atrocities by all combatants. The most severe barbarities on the white side - and they were grim indeed - came from transported prisoner-settlers (often the worst sort of men). The British state, if it did anything, tried to calm things down (and failed quite badly)
So a black mark against the British Empire, but no, not Nazi Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_War
(I thank you!)
(It was a few years ago to be fair!)
In Kilburn now they are more likely to sell you sweetbread bruschetta, or stab you
That and offering to buy the first round seems to make people happy to see you….
"Boris Johnson fails to give MPs commitment defence spending will rise to 2.5% of GDP by end of decade"
"No 10 refuses to deny PM referred to disgraced MP as 'Pincher by name, pincher by nature' before making him deputy chief whip"
*PB group hug*
So either everyone did, or everyone just blanked him ?
It's usually the only round anyone can remember who paid for it by the end of the evening.
Depends on which part of the United States you are talking about:
Examples: 1777 "The Constitution of the Vermont Republic partially bans slavery,[64] freeing men over 21 and women older than 18 at the time of its passage.[65] The ban is not strongly enforced."
1783 "Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed."
1787 "The United States in Congress Assembled passes the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, outlawing any new slavery in the Northwest Territories." (The area covered by the ordinance became Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.)
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_abolition_of_slavery_and_serfdom (That timeline deserves study, even though it omits the Gulag and the similar camps in Communist China.)
In other northern states, prior to the Civil War, slavery was often banned gradually, but it was banned in all of them long before the war.
https://mobile.twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/1543985129818689536
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corfu_Channel_incident
Maybe he was just trying to skin you out of an extra quid or two!
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/cricket/test-matches/england-v-india-betting-31556639
"Chicago's bloody holiday weekend continues: 54 people shot, 7 dead since Friday evening"
Needs must I guess.
And this needs saying because it is true and is denied, and you don't get reconciliation without truth. I think CRT is bollocks but I can see why you would advance it in the face of huge denial of the enormous wrong done to your ancestors.
Also known as "Hate England Day" however NOT in the USA.
Liberty's Kids - FOURTH OF JULY SPECIAL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLhVc5FdtIM
That's "Chicago" by only the broadest of definitions.
Bit like considering Esher as the inner city badlands of London.
Continual whataboutery concerning slavery is tiring. It was wrong.
No matter what anyone else was doing.
India might well win, but many (by no means all) of the TMS team are er – how can we put this – stuck in the past.
I think their favourite term "proper Test cricket" should be banned from the airwaves.
There's no evidence they will as yet.
1801
Agriculture 30.8%
Industry 31.4%
Services 37.8%
(Broadberry, S. N. and Leeuwen, Bas van (2010) British economic growth and the business cycle, 1700-1870 : annual estimates)
Daniel Norcross
BBC Test Match Special
WinViz is quite preposterous, it now suggests that England are favourites to win.
Great stuff again.
Another 50 from these two and I might start to believe.
It was decided the operation, and especially the lengthy recovery period and physio was not for her and she is to live with restrictive movement
This is the first time since we had our children that she has not had her own car and independence, but she is just so pragmatic and realistic
We have so much to be grateful for and indeed grandchild number 5 due on the 1st September
And I am delighted to be her own personal chauffeur from now on
On the fiftieth anniversary of the ratification of the Declaration of Independence, the US lost two of the men most responsible for its creation. Independence Day 1826 might be the most important since July 4, 1776.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6Ev9m7Qx8I
HUGE mini session coming up!
“We saw the carnage in and around tea”
Cricket. Only cricket
Instead its "we're looking forwards not backwards". Great! But ignoring the twin elephants in the room (our lack of a free trade deal hanks to having no customs or single market deals) just makes his position nothing but hot air.
Haven't had a car for some time now, and still miss it.