The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Look at what is happening in Ukraine right now. Before Putin's Special Clusterfuck, the Ukes were a bit nebulous, half Russian, half Polish, half hmmm (Putin actually had a historical point, tho it does not begin to justify his hideous war)
Now, the Ukrainians are ABSOLUTELY a nation. They are the people who got attacked by Russia. They will be the people that endured that horrible war (inshallah). "Ukrainian-ness" will be off the dial by the end of all this
Putin will achieve the complete opposite of what he intended
Perhaps more interesting is that it seems to have crystallised a vision of Ukraine as a European country, preaching (and practising to certain extent so far) inclusivity and the liberal European outlook in general.
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Car parks are an ongoing issue, I guess this will just increase the rate at which they have to be demolished before they fail.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
The importance of the 19th century in setting standards for English history matters here - an era when Britain was panicking about the prospect of naval invasion by everyone from Napoleon to the Kaiser. To me the idea that the average peasant in the 8th century was seeing themselves as "English" is a stretch.
He did say 'began to feel'. The start of a process, which we know took centuries.
Oh, for sure. The seeds of a new identity likely began as soon as Germanic-speakers found themselves amid Britons and a few straggler Latin speakers. But I was focused on the "REALLY English" part, which can't "really" precede the late 9th century. Before that, almost nobody outside the transnational Church hierarchy has a pan-English viewpoint as opposed to a Northumbrian / Saxon / Mercian one.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Look at what is happening in Ukraine right now. Before Putin's Special Clusterfuck, the Ukes were a bit nebulous, half Russian, half Polish, half hmmm (Putin actually had a historical point, tho it does not begin to justify his hideous war)
Now, the Ukrainians are ABSOLUTELY a nation. They are the people who got attacked by Russia. They will be the people that endured that horrible war (inshallah). "Ukrainian-ness" will be off the dial by the end of all this
Putin will achieve the complete opposite of what he intended
Perhaps more interesting is that it seems to have crystallised a vision of Ukraine as a European country, preaching (and practising to certain extent so far) inclusivity and the liberal European outlook in general.
While simultaneously setting conditions in Russia for a remake of Death of Stalin with various private-ish armies circling for Putin's demise.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
I think that's right.
And, actually, these really were invasions (even if the numbers were not huge, relative to the pre-existing population). Attempts to rewrite the Vikings as peaceful traders and farmers are a form of revisionism too far. A trader and farmer could be a warrior and pirate, according to circumstance.
I think it was in one of Cornwell's Last Kingdom novel afterwords where he talked about that revisionism, albeit he is not a historian. He talked about the definitive proof we have of establishment of fortified towns/burhs and just how expensive and difficult that would have been, and you just don't do that unless you are facing serious and existential military threat.
The burh at Wareham, for instance, is still very impressive.
I suspect we're unlikely to hear much if substance about the counteroffensive fir several days. News from the Ukrainian side is going to be delayed until it's no longer tactically relevant.
The comedy from Russia.
"We've defeated the counteroffensive. In full. On day one. Every Ukrainian is dead."
Even during Kursk (which turned into a German disaster) it took from about the 4th to the 7th July before Germany started to recognise the offensive had failed and that the Soviets were using it to take the initiative and launch their own counterattack.
You really think Reddit is a source of top historians?
Anglo Saxons certainly were an accepted group, from the Saxon coast in Germany and Anglia in southern Denmark
That first reddit post seems rather disjointed to me. Perhaps a better question may be:
Did the Angles and Saxons see *themselves* as a distinct ethnic group / groups?
Compared to the Romano British and Celts and later the Normans, absolutely
Not sure we’re any more likely to get the nuanced discussion this debate requires on pb.com any more than on Reddit or in the Telegraph (though it is nice to see the latter featuring a story which isn’t on trans, though who knows: ‘what is an Anglo-Saxon woman?’ may be the next brainwave)
The idea that people in dark ages Europe (especially at the fringes of Rome and beyond) considered themselves as belonging to ethnic groups in the way we define them today really is debatable. That it remained a defined and coherent identity till more or less the present day, is quite a stretch, especially given the pot-pourri of genetic and cultural admixture over the centuries since. ‘English’ is a much more helpful term than ‘Anglo-Saxon’. I am unquestionably the former, but it would be a huge stretch to define me as the latter.
England didn't emerge as anything approaching a nation until Athelstan in the 10th century.
The Anglo Saxons arrived in the 8th century, so for historians Anglo Saxon and the Anglo Saxon Kingdoms of Mercia, Northumbria and Wessex and Kent, Essex, Sussex and East Anglia remain very useful terms for describing that period
I think we’re talking at cross purposes here. My point is really that ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is a useless term applied in a modern context. I agree that it’s reasonably sensible to use it it in the context of 8th century history etc.
But HYUFD told us recently about the Anglo-Saxon countries today, about how the US, Denmark etc. are all the same, or something…
Anglo Saxons originally came from Germany and Denmark, they then moved to England displacing the Celts, who retreated largely to Wales and parts of Cornwall and Romano British (with some Normans later added on top at the elite aristocratic end) and the English then formed the bulk of the British colonisers of North America (where even today most Americans have ancestry from Germany or Britain and most Australians and New Zealanders and Canadians outside Quebec British ancestry too).
Utterly wrong. For a start there was no distinction between 'Celts' and Romano-British. By the time of the Germanic migrations they were the same thing. Secondly all the evidence is that there was complete integration between the Germanic migrants and the Romano-British. This is shown time and time again across the country by archaeoleogy. Moreover the Germanic migrants had been in Britain living alongside the Romano-British since at least the end of the 3rd century. Indeed it is likely that it was they who maintained the veneer of Roman civilisation along the Thames valley for more than half a century after the withdrawal of direct Imperial control.
Nor did the Anglo-Saxons 'arrive' in the 8th century. As I said, the Germanic tribes - Angles, Saxons, Jutes and others had been arriving in Britain since the 3rd century and in significant numbers since the early 5th century.
And Offa referred to himself as Rex Anglorum more than 150 years before Aethelstan. Bede refers to 'The English' in the early 8th century.
Fascinating, Richard. Thank you.
So this 'boat people' problem we are experiencing is not a new phenomenon then?
Not at all. And in much the same way, the 'invasions' were a myth in the Early Medieval Period just as much as they are now.
I was always supportive of the "there was no large scale migration" theory. And I still am.
However, my confidence was somewhat shaken by this paper from the Max Planck Institute last Autumn.
The migrations were not a myth. The idea that they were an 'invasion' or a conquest is a myth - in my view.
We know that there were large scale migrations. What is changing is our view of the nature of those migrations.
Even so, look at a site like West Heslerton in Yorkshire. The cemetery there which dates to the migration period contained over 200 burials in the classical 'Anglian' style. And yet when they were tested using Oxygen and Strontium isotope testing of the teeth, only one was found to have grown up outside the British Isles.
Oh, sure - sorry. I did mistake that completely! Yes; I completely agree with this perspective. The only nuance is in what you mean by "large scale".
Large enough to become the dominant cultural influence - certainly. What surprises me is that it seems that it was large enough to become the dominant genetic heritage, very rapidly.
It depends on what they were assimilating into. One of the theories which seems to be backed up by both archaeology and genetics is that the Germanic migrants were coming into a largely empty landscape. The late RB economy of southern Britain was dominated by the villa landscape with much of the non essential population having been removed or killed. Once that villa landscape collapsed there would not have been a huge RB population left - probably much smaller than that existing prior to the Roman invasion.
Added to this we know there were a whole series of devestating plagues across the Empire in the 3rd and 4th centuries and these may well have contributed to a population collapse as well.
It is not difficult to become the dominant genetic heritage when a sigbificant portion of the preceding genetic population is already gone by the time you arrive.
Again, hypothesis but with a lot of supporting evidence.
One slightly odd bit of evidence which doesn't fit though is that we apparently speak Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) language but using what is thought to be a Brythonic grammar system. Also the West Heslerton example I mentioned earlier doesn't necessarily fit this empty landscape hypothesis.
I also sense that the general trend in the evidence is in discovering more continuity of use, for longer than previously assumed (in the SE at least). Which smooths it all out a bit.
My feeling is that there are probably "locally" empty landscapes (especially in those mid-range villa landscapes that are abandoned to more subsistence family enclosures when the villa complex itself is becoming irreparable) and the migrants occupy that landscape (which is "known good" farmland); they then become culturally and genetically dominant in that space. Their success, and the interactions with the wider network are what develops our hybrid germanic/brythonic language.
A Chinese assessment posted in Feb. 25, 2022, predicting Russia’s victory against #Ukraine within 48 hours and tying lessons learned to a planed blitzkrieg against #Taiwan, predicting PRC victory in 72 hrs. I’m curious what Chines analysts would say today. https://twitter.com/andrewmichta/status/1665573794428203009
Something along the lines of "we shouldn't have copied all this Russian shit" but in Mandarin.
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Just checked, the weight of my Peugeot is 1185 Kg. The main issue is like for like EV cars are rather heavier than their ICE counterparts so assuming the same "mix" means more road degradation, structural impact on bridges; car parks etc. Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Good to see it's history day on PB. Always enjoy reading the comments.
Indeed, there are some very well-informed comments. Though I was recently struck by this comment in an article about [edit] in part, anti-woke crusaders trying to wreck historical research:
'“If you take pride in the past,” a Latin American researcher said with quiet exasperation before leaving, “then you have to take responsibility, too.”'
Good to see it's history day on PB. Always enjoy reading the comments.
Indeed, there are some very well-informed comments. Though I was recently struck by this comment in an article about [edit] in part, anti-woke crusaders trying to wreck historical research:
'“If you take pride in the past,” a Latin American researcher said with quiet exasperation before leaving, “then you have to take responsibility, too.”'
A daft statement maybe forgivable based on poor language skills, but from my memory of the article, not likely.
You do not have to take responsibility for anything at all that preceded your birth. This does not preclude you from feeling pleasure about the ability of your fellow community to achieve things.
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Just checked, the weight of my Peugeot is 1185 Kg. The main issue is like for like EV cars are rather heavier than their ICE counterparts so assuming the same "mix" means more road degradation, structural impact on bridges; car parks etc. Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
We did this a little bit the other night. The article say average 500kg heavier, the article I read the other night said 400kg. The other issue if at the moment buying like for like doesn't work for a lot of people, as range on small EVs is still too low, so you will get a proportion of people going from a 1200kg ICE to a 2000kg EV, because they need the range provided by the bigger car.
Pollution on tyre degradation is apparently one often overlooked element,
Well police now crawling all over next door with forensic van as well. Spoke to son and told him that him challenging the burglars probably deterred them, well done, gold star etc and would he give a statement etc.
I have done up / rebuilt two houses and have never had builders leave their tools in any sort of storage locker.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
And the SUV-ness is a big problem, electric or not.
The Telegraph really is a blooming awful parody of a newspaper these days. At some level, I blame their decision to stay broadsheet when everyone else went compact.
Glad to see that the Torygraph is having a pile-on with regards to the Hallett enquiry - Lockdown didn't save enough lives for the cost apparently.
That may be the case. May not. Either way, that's an assessment made with 2023 hindsight, not one that could have been made in 2020.
It is fascinating that the client journalists of the right-wing lockdown naysayers are putting a value on lives saved. I suspect if one of those lives saved from lockdowns was theirs or their loved ones, they might have an alternative view on the relative success of Government action.
Or were shape-shifting lizards immune from the effects of COVID?
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
Back in the day, I used to work for one of the global leading players in this industry. I remember rather taken aback when after working on a UK road project which required incredible amount of modelling by hand and computer, I worked on a US project, which (I am slightly exaggerating but not much) basically told pick a bridge from the catalogue, change the numbers, done. When I said, but if it isn't designed for the specific scenario, won't it at very least significantly reduce life expectancy, and I was just given a nod of yeap, but we don't make the rules.
Good to see it's history day on PB. Always enjoy reading the comments.
Indeed, there are some very well-informed comments. Though I was recently struck by this comment in an article about [edit] in part, anti-woke crusaders trying to wreck historical research:
'“If you take pride in the past,” a Latin American researcher said with quiet exasperation before leaving, “then you have to take responsibility, too.”'
Don't expect Scottish Nationalists to take much responsibility for the often brutal executions and killings of their hero William Wallace!
You really think Reddit is a source of top historians?
Anglo Saxons certainly were an accepted group, from the Saxon coast in Germany and Anglia in southern Denmark
That first reddit post seems rather disjointed to me. Perhaps a better question may be:
Did the Angles and Saxons see *themselves* as a distinct ethnic group / groups?
Compared to the Romano British and Celts and later the Normans, absolutely
Not sure we’re any more likely to get the nuanced discussion this debate requires on pb.com any more than on Reddit or in the Telegraph (though it is nice to see the latter featuring a story which isn’t on trans, though who knows: ‘what is an Anglo-Saxon woman?’ may be the next brainwave)
The idea that people in dark ages Europe (especially at the fringes of Rome and beyond) considered themselves as belonging to ethnic groups in the way we define them today really is debatable. That it remained a defined and coherent identity till more or less the present day, is quite a stretch, especially given the pot-pourri of genetic and cultural admixture over the centuries since. ‘English’ is a much more helpful term than ‘Anglo-Saxon’. I am unquestionably the former, but it would be a huge stretch to define me as the latter.
England didn't emerge as anything approaching a nation until Athelstan in the 10th century.
The Anglo Saxons arrived in the 8th century, so for historians Anglo Saxon and the Anglo Saxon Kingdoms of Mercia, Northumbria and Wessex and Kent, Essex, Sussex and East Anglia remain very useful terms for describing that period
I think we’re talking at cross purposes here. My point is really that ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is a useless term applied in a modern context. I agree that it’s reasonably sensible to use it it in the context of 8th century history etc.
But HYUFD told us recently about the Anglo-Saxon countries today, about how the US, Denmark etc. are all the same, or something…
Anglo Saxons originally came from Germany and Denmark, they then moved to England displacing the Celts, who retreated largely to Wales and parts of Cornwall and Romano British (with some Normans later added on top at the elite aristocratic end) and the English then formed the bulk of the British colonisers of North America (where even today most Americans have ancestry from Germany or Britain and most Australians and New Zealanders and Canadians outside Quebec British ancestry too).
Utterly wrong. For a start there was no distinction between 'Celts' and Romano-British. By the time of the Germanic migrations they were the same thing. Secondly all the evidence is that there was complete integration between the Germanic migrants and the Romano-British. This is shown time and time again across the country by archaeoleogy. Moreover the Germanic migrants had been in Britain living alongside the Romano-British since at least the end of the 3rd century. Indeed it is likely that it was they who maintained the veneer of Roman civilisation along the Thames valley for more than half a century after the withdrawal of direct Imperial control.
Nor did the Anglo-Saxons 'arrive' in the 8th century. As I said, the Germanic tribes - Angles, Saxons, Jutes and others had been arriving in Britain since the 3rd century and in significant numbers since the early 5th century.
And Offa referred to himself as Rex Anglorum more than 150 years before Aethelstan. Bede refers to 'The English' in the early 8th century.
Fascinating, Richard. Thank you.
So this 'boat people' problem we are experiencing is not a new phenomenon then?
Not at all. And in much the same way, the 'invasions' were a myth in the Early Medieval Period just as much as they are now.
I was always supportive of the "there was no large scale migration" theory. And I still am.
However, my confidence was somewhat shaken by this paper from the Max Planck Institute last Autumn.
The migrations were not a myth. The idea that they were an 'invasion' or a conquest is a myth - in my view.
We know that there were large scale migrations. What is changing is our view of the nature of those migrations.
Even so, look at a site like West Heslerton in Yorkshire. The cemetery there which dates to the migration period contained over 200 burials in the classical 'Anglian' style. And yet when they were tested using Oxygen and Strontium isotope testing of the teeth, only one was found to have grown up outside the British Isles.
Oh, sure - sorry. I did mistake that completely! Yes; I completely agree with this perspective. The only nuance is in what you mean by "large scale".
Large enough to become the dominant cultural influence - certainly. What surprises me is that it seems that it was large enough to become the dominant genetic heritage, very rapidly.
It depends on what they were assimilating into. One of the theories which seems to be backed up by both archaeology and genetics is that the Germanic migrants were coming into a largely empty landscape. The late RB economy of southern Britain was dominated by the villa landscape with much of the non essential population having been removed or killed. Once that villa landscape collapsed there would not have been a huge RB population left - probably much smaller than that existing prior to the Roman invasion.
Added to this we know there were a whole series of devestating plagues across the Empire in the 3rd and 4th centuries and these may well have contributed to a population collapse as well.
It is not difficult to become the dominant genetic heritage when a sigbificant portion of the preceding genetic population is already gone by the time you arrive.
Again, hypothesis but with a lot of supporting evidence.
One slightly odd bit of evidence which doesn't fit though is that we apparently speak Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) language but using what is thought to be a Brythonic grammar system. Also the West Heslerton example I mentioned earlier doesn't necessarily fit this empty landscape hypothesis.
I also sense that the general trend in the evidence is in discovering more continuity of use, for longer than previously assumed (in the SE at least). Which smooths it all out a bit.
My feeling is that there are probably "locally" empty landscapes (especially in those mid-range villa landscapes that are abandoned to more subsistence family enclosures when the villa complex itself is becoming irreparable) and the migrants occupy that landscape (which is "known good" farmland); they then become culturally and genetically dominant in that space. Their success, and the interactions with the wider network are what develops our hybrid germanic/brythonic language.
(One additional point is the de-industrialization: the large scale metal-processing, and potteries seem to die very, very quickly; that will have caused a rapid dispersal of the population).
Under construction Aguwani-Sultanganj bridge in Bihar’s Bhagalpur collapses. The moment when bridge collapsed was caught on video by locals. This is the second time the bridge has collapsed. Further details awaited.
Good to see it's history day on PB. Always enjoy reading the comments.
Indeed, there are some very well-informed comments. Though I was recently struck by this comment in an article about [edit] in part, anti-woke crusaders trying to wreck historical research:
'“If you take pride in the past,” a Latin American researcher said with quiet exasperation before leaving, “then you have to take responsibility, too.”'
Don't expect Scottish Nationalists to take much responsibility for the often brutal executions and killings of their hero William Wallace!
Some of us don't believe in heroes, unlike you, and certainly not for trying to shore up 21st century political parties.
The last two NATO Secretary-Generals have been former PMs, so on profile grounds they might like another ex-PM (both were long serving PMs, put your hand down Liz). Nordic PMs too, so if they want to keep the trend going and give a boost to new Members Sanna Marin will be out of a job soon.
Looking further back it is a bit of a mixed back - mostly relatively short serving Foreign and Defence Ministers, and you have to go back to the 50s to get another ex-PM. Perhaps they are getting a bit more grand in their ambitions for the role, or PMs are leaving office younger and need other good gigs.
You really think Reddit is a source of top historians?
Anglo Saxons certainly were an accepted group, from the Saxon coast in Germany and Anglia in southern Denmark
That first reddit post seems rather disjointed to me. Perhaps a better question may be:
Did the Angles and Saxons see *themselves* as a distinct ethnic group / groups?
Compared to the Romano British and Celts and later the Normans, absolutely
Not sure we’re any more likely to get the nuanced discussion this debate requires on pb.com any more than on Reddit or in the Telegraph (though it is nice to see the latter featuring a story which isn’t on trans, though who knows: ‘what is an Anglo-Saxon woman?’ may be the next brainwave)
The idea that people in dark ages Europe (especially at the fringes of Rome and beyond) considered themselves as belonging to ethnic groups in the way we define them today really is debatable. That it remained a defined and coherent identity till more or less the present day, is quite a stretch, especially given the pot-pourri of genetic and cultural admixture over the centuries since. ‘English’ is a much more helpful term than ‘Anglo-Saxon’. I am unquestionably the former, but it would be a huge stretch to define me as the latter.
England didn't emerge as anything approaching a nation until Athelstan in the 10th century.
The Anglo Saxons arrived in the 8th century, so for historians Anglo Saxon and the Anglo Saxon Kingdoms of Mercia, Northumbria and Wessex and Kent, Essex, Sussex and East Anglia remain very useful terms for describing that period
I think we’re talking at cross purposes here. My point is really that ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is a useless term applied in a modern context. I agree that it’s reasonably sensible to use it it in the context of 8th century history etc.
It's complete nonsense as applied to the modern world.
We are talking historians studying the 8th century
If I recall correctly you were originally talking about an Anglo Saxon identity in Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Yes which is also correct as I pointed out earlier as those nations also have English Anglo Saxon heritage and the US English and German Anglo Saxon heritage
There's definitely no such thing as 'German Anglo Saxon heritage' in any universe.
There is, most of them voted for Boris and Trump (Trump has German ancestry)! Indeed Trump was originally Drumpf from the German Palatinate
Yes I was wrong - WASP is sometimes used in the US to include other 'white protestant' background people. The Telegraph should get upset about this as it is clearly a perversion of the use of the term 'Anglo-Saxon'!
Your link about Trump doesn't seem to mention 'anglo-saxon' at all, so not sure what the relevance is? I'm pretty sure his German ancestors would never have thought of themselves as 'Anglo-Saxon'. Also not sure which people of 'German Anglo Saxon heritage' voted for Johnson, the term doesn't seem to have any meaning in the British context.
So far as Mr Trump has UK ancestry, I believe it is primarily Gaelic - i.e. very much not Angles or Saxons or Danes or Normans.
Actually someone in the Hebrides could have more than a dash of Norse/Viking.
I can’t find the link now, but that big genetic study of the UK a few years back found that the big genetic variation is between Orkney/Shetland and everywhere else. England, Wales, Northern Ireland and most of Scotland are all mixed up, but the Orkney and Shetland Islands retain distinct Scandinavian genetic markers.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Some are just invented, like Belgium.
Or Britain.
All are invented, we are all but humans after all. It's merely a question of degree, eg If someone just decided tomorrow that the south of France was its own nation called Ecnarf.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
(The Tesla Model Y is around 2t.)
I seemed to remember in some states in the US, the F150 is by miles the biggest selling vehicle. Not just the biggest selling truck, the biggest selling vehicle. Its basically the only thing that makes Ford big money, and enables them to stay afloat.
Re the Anglo-Saxons, if we can’t call them “Anglo-Saxons” then what do we call the Germanic invaders who took over the country in the 4th-6th century, displacing Romano-Brits and Celts?
Coz that definitely happened. We can see from place-name evidence. Everywhere
Crikey, yes. Yet again some guy posting on a discussion site completely outwits the academic establishment by spotting something all the eggheads had missed. There'll be some red faces in our universities today. Thank heaven for the Internet.
I’m actually not disputing the Woke academics here on the term (I’ve always felt “Anglo-Saxon” is slightly clumsy). I’m saying the ARGUMENT is a Woke irrelevance. In the 4th-6th century a bunch of Germanic types with a new culture and language came over to Britain and altered our gene pool and changed all the place names. That indisputably happened (you can call it an invasion or not, that’s not my point)
These people need a name. If it can’t be Anglo-Saxon then what will that name be?
As I say, only “early English” is short and pithy enough to work but that will just get the lefties even angrier
The crux of the issue, when not misrepresented by ignorant commentators, is whether the label refers to a distinct ethnic group. It does not, despite the beliefs of some who would rather it did. The reason why they would rather it did fits into the reason for it being a relevant question. Those who would seek to build their politics on a pillar of racial purity or superiority have a fatal flaw in the foundations of their ideology.
Sadly these people still exist and their reaction is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.
I think that a group of people that one can call Anglo-Saxons, or English, had become a distinct ethnic group, by the middle of the 10th century, and I see nothing in the Reddit article that conflicts with that.
That's very different from saying that these people formed the basis of some kind of pure or superior race.
The same way I'd say that Germans existed at this time. They just weren't the kind of people that 19th Century German nationalists thought they were.
I generally agree but I think Englishness as a concept began forming - embryonically - 200 years earlier. Mid 8th century?
There were a lot of petty kingdoms but they also felt a kinship. And they had the “other” of the celts in wales, northwest Scotland and Cornwall - and then the Vikings - against which to distinguish themselves
They shared a lot, culturally, yes, from an early stage.
The development of Wessex is something I'd love to know more about. It ultimately, became England, yet its first four kings had Roman/British names. Was the House of Wessex actually a native Roman/British dynasty, that gradually adopted English culture?
It’s a beautifully romantic idea
And I speak as a direct descendant of Maud Ingelric, a Saxon princess, daughter of the Anglo-Saxon keeper of the Grail, alleged concubine of William the Conqueror and buried in her own monastery at Hatfield Peverel
I’ve been to see her. Granny Maud
Always suspected you were originally descended from an Essex Girl!
You really think Reddit is a source of top historians?
Anglo Saxons certainly were an accepted group, from the Saxon coast in Germany and Anglia in southern Denmark
That first reddit post seems rather disjointed to me. Perhaps a better question may be:
Did the Angles and Saxons see *themselves* as a distinct ethnic group / groups?
Compared to the Romano British and Celts and later the Normans, absolutely
Not sure we’re any more likely to get the nuanced discussion this debate requires on pb.com any more than on Reddit or in the Telegraph (though it is nice to see the latter featuring a story which isn’t on trans, though who knows: ‘what is an Anglo-Saxon woman?’ may be the next brainwave)
The idea that people in dark ages Europe (especially at the fringes of Rome and beyond) considered themselves as belonging to ethnic groups in the way we define them today really is debatable. That it remained a defined and coherent identity till more or less the present day, is quite a stretch, especially given the pot-pourri of genetic and cultural admixture over the centuries since. ‘English’ is a much more helpful term than ‘Anglo-Saxon’. I am unquestionably the former, but it would be a huge stretch to define me as the latter.
England didn't emerge as anything approaching a nation until Athelstan in the 10th century.
The Anglo Saxons arrived in the 8th century, so for historians Anglo Saxon and the Anglo Saxon Kingdoms of Mercia, Northumbria and Wessex and Kent, Essex, Sussex and East Anglia remain very useful terms for describing that period
I think we’re talking at cross purposes here. My point is really that ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is a useless term applied in a modern context. I agree that it’s reasonably sensible to use it it in the context of 8th century history etc.
But HYUFD told us recently about the Anglo-Saxon countries today, about how the US, Denmark etc. are all the same, or something…
Anglo Saxons originally came from Germany and Denmark, they then moved to England displacing the Celts, who retreated largely to Wales and parts of Cornwall and Romano British (with some Normans later added on top at the elite aristocratic end) and the English then formed the bulk of the British colonisers of North America (where even today most Americans have ancestry from Germany or Britain and most Australians and New Zealanders and Canadians outside Quebec British ancestry too).
Utterly wrong. For a start there was no distinction between 'Celts' and Romano-British. By the time of the Germanic migrations they were the same thing. Secondly all the evidence is that there was complete integration between the Germanic migrants and the Romano-British. This is shown time and time again across the country by archaeoleogy. Moreover the Germanic migrants had been in Britain living alongside the Romano-British since at least the end of the 3rd century. Indeed it is likely that it was they who maintained the veneer of Roman civilisation along the Thames valley for more than half a century after the withdrawal of direct Imperial control.
Nor did the Anglo-Saxons 'arrive' in the 8th century. As I said, the Germanic tribes - Angles, Saxons, Jutes and others had been arriving in Britain since the 3rd century and in significant numbers since the early 5th century.
And Offa referred to himself as Rex Anglorum more than 150 years before Aethelstan. Bede refers to 'The English' in the early 8th century.
Fascinating, Richard. Thank you.
So this 'boat people' problem we are experiencing is not a new phenomenon then?
Not at all. And in much the same way, the 'invasions' were a myth in the Early Medieval Period just as much as they are now.
I was always supportive of the "there was no large scale migration" theory. And I still am.
However, my confidence was somewhat shaken by this paper from the Max Planck Institute last Autumn.
The migrations were not a myth. The idea that they were an 'invasion' or a conquest is a myth - in my view.
We know that there were large scale migrations. What is changing is our view of the nature of those migrations.
Even so, look at a site like West Heslerton in Yorkshire. The cemetery there which dates to the migration period contained over 200 burials in the classical 'Anglian' style. And yet when they were tested using Oxygen and Strontium isotope testing of the teeth, only one was found to have grown up outside the British Isles.
Oh, sure - sorry. I did mistake that completely! Yes; I completely agree with this perspective. The only nuance is in what you mean by "large scale".
Large enough to become the dominant cultural influence - certainly. What surprises me is that it seems that it was large enough to become the dominant genetic heritage, very rapidly.
It depends on what they were assimilating into. One of the theories which seems to be backed up by both archaeology and genetics is that the Germanic migrants were coming into a largely empty landscape. The late RB economy of southern Britain was dominated by the villa landscape with much of the non essential population having been removed or killed. Once that villa landscape collapsed there would not have been a huge RB population left - probably much smaller than that existing prior to the Roman invasion.
Added to this we know there were a whole series of devestating plagues across the Empire in the 3rd and 4th centuries and these may well have contributed to a population collapse as well.
It is not difficult to become the dominant genetic heritage when a sigbificant portion of the preceding genetic population is already gone by the time you arrive.
Again, hypothesis but with a lot of supporting evidence.
One slightly odd bit of evidence which doesn't fit though is that we apparently speak Anglo-Saxon (Germanic) language but using what is thought to be a Brythonic grammar system. Also the West Heslerton example I mentioned earlier doesn't necessarily fit this empty landscape hypothesis.
I also sense that the general trend in the evidence is in discovering more continuity of use, for longer than previously assumed (in the SE at least). Which smooths it all out a bit.
My feeling is that there are probably "locally" empty landscapes (especially in those mid-range villa landscapes that are abandoned to more subsistence family enclosures when the villa complex itself is becoming irreparable) and the migrants occupy that landscape (which is "known good" farmland); they then become culturally and genetically dominant in that space. Their success, and the interactions with the wider network are what develops our hybrid germanic/brythonic language.
(One additional point is the de-industrialization: the large scale metal-processing, and potteries seem to die very, very quickly; that will have caused a rapid dispersal of the population).
Possibly a lot of organised agriculture, too - though I know little about the period, so that's speculation.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
(The Tesla Model Y is around 2t.)
I seemed to remember in some states in the US, the F150 is by miles the biggest selling vehicle. Not just the biggest selling truck, the biggest selling vehicle. Its basically the only thing that makes Ford big money, and enables them to stay afloat.
Yes. Rowan Atkinson's largely nonsense article in the Guardian might actually have a point regarding lighter solid state batteries, when it comes to the US...
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
(The Tesla Model Y is around 2t.)
I seemed to remember in some states in the US, the F150 is by miles the biggest selling vehicle. Not just the biggest selling truck, the biggest selling vehicle. Its basically the only thing that makes Ford big money, and enables them to stay afloat.
We need to tax that sort of vehicle to the hilt in the UK, it's an electric powered pothole generator.
Incidentally the second Secretary-General of NATO, Paul-Henri Spaak, is the most Winston Churchill looking fellow not to be named Churchill I've ever seen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-Henri_Spaak
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Some are just invented, like Belgium.
Doesn't apply to Belgium, but straight lines on a map are normally a dead giveaway for 'artificial' countries.
Why is Belgium any more artificial than most countries? The only countries that aren't artificial or 'just invented' are the ones comprising of a single island
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Some are just invented, like Belgium.
Doesn't apply to Belgium, but straight lines on a map are normally a dead giveaway for 'artificial' countries.
Why is Belgium any more artificial than most countries? The only countries that aren't artificial or 'just invented' are the ones comprising of a single island
Even island ones would be artificial - it's not as though islands, even small ones, were always considered one nation. Some only became unified violently, and thus artificially (albeit the prior divisiosn will also have been artificial).
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Some are just invented, like Belgium.
Or Britain.
All are invented, we are all but humans after all. It's merely a question of degree, eg If someone just decided tomorrow that the south of France was its own nation called Ecnarf.
In real life, Padania was about at that level. I think Lega even sold national team football kits at one stage!
Glad to see that the Torygraph is having a pile-on with regards to the Hallett enquiry - Lockdown didn't save enough lives for the cost apparently.
That may be the case. May not. Either way, that's an assessment made with 2023 hindsight, not one that could have been made in 2020.
Perhaps it couldn't have been made in March 2020. But surely by June that year some effort should have been made to weigh costs and benefits against each other.
I can forgive the initial panicked lockdown in response to unknown circumstances. I can't really forgive keeping it there, to a greater or lesser extent, for the next 16 months. Nor the silencing of anyone who called for less lockdown.
You weigh up your own cost and benefits mate!
Lockdowns worked for me and I can prove it by the fact that I am still walking and talking.
My cost benefit analysis for late lockdowns in September 20 and December 20 can be counted in the fatality statistics for Autumn 2020 and Winter 2020/21.
We've been over before the links between lockdown and fatality statistics. I think they're weak. But put that aside: the point is that no effort was ever made to assess the costs of lockdown. This is pretty unique in the history of big government decisions. That is pretty much what the civil service is for. (So I'm not sure why you're suggesting I do my own cost benefit analysis.) We argue over HS2, for example, but considerable attempts are made to quantity the costs of it.
Costs of lockdown include trillions of pounds of debt - that much we know - money which could then be spent to save lives - but also the life chances of a generation. We know full well the negative impact of long periods of absence from school on life chances. There will be more life years lost just through that than lockdown could ever save. And countless other costs too, not least those on quality of life: I only get 80-odd years on this planet, and rankle somewhat at having to spend one and a bit of one of the best of them unable to do much.
And having said all that, of course there are degrees of lockdown, and of course I'm not suggesting that nothing should have been done - just that far less should have been done. Far more should have been allowed to open (with schools top of the list), and reopenings should have happened much earlier (I'm thinking in particular of the dodgy data upon which Hancock insisted on a final four weeks of closures in June 2021). There was an almost religious attachment to lockdowns: if only we can sacrifice enough, hurt ourselves enough, God will favour us and the great plague will go away. They were a very blunt, very harmful tool.
Japan, a populous island nation with a similar climate to ours, had no national lockdowns and a much lower death rate. It’s not clear why Japan did much better. I note that they did close schools at times. Mask-wearing is and was also commonplace. Some have discussed a different, less individualistic culture than in the West. Others have suggested the more decentralised nature of Japanese government allowing prompt local responses. Other ideas are around the country’s focus on early detection and on public health education to support behaviour change.
What game is he playing? I get the rivalry between warlords aspect, and portraying his forces as stronger and more effective, but there's encouraging rivalry in your underlings and then having them just troll each other with insults.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
(The Tesla Model Y is around 2t.)
I seemed to remember in some states in the US, the F150 is by miles the biggest selling vehicle. Not just the biggest selling truck, the biggest selling vehicle. Its basically the only thing that makes Ford big money, and enables them to stay afloat.
We need to tax that sort of vehicle to the hilt in the UK, it's an electric powered pothole generator.
There's quite a lot of ICE Range Rovers around and they weigh about 2.5 tons.
Glad to see that the Torygraph is having a pile-on with regards to the Hallett enquiry - Lockdown didn't save enough lives for the cost apparently.
That may be the case. May not. Either way, that's an assessment made with 2023 hindsight, not one that could have been made in 2020.
Perhaps it couldn't have been made in March 2020. But surely by June that year some effort should have been made to weigh costs and benefits against each other.
I can forgive the initial panicked lockdown in response to unknown circumstances. I can't really forgive keeping it there, to a greater or lesser extent, for the next 16 months. Nor the silencing of anyone who called for less lockdown.
You weigh up your own cost and benefits mate!
Lockdowns worked for me and I can prove it by the fact that I am still walking and talking.
My cost benefit analysis for late lockdowns in September 20 and December 20 can be counted in the fatality statistics for Autumn 2020 and Winter 2020/21.
We've been over before the links between lockdown and fatality statistics. I think they're weak. But put that aside: the point is that no effort was ever made to assess the costs of lockdown. This is pretty unique in the history of big government decisions. That is pretty much what the civil service is for. (So I'm not sure why you're suggesting I do my own cost benefit analysis.) We argue over HS2, for example, but considerable attempts are made to quantity the costs of it.
Costs of lockdown include trillions of pounds of debt - that much we know - money which could then be spent to save lives - but also the life chances of a generation. We know full well the negative impact of long periods of absence from school on life chances. There will be more life years lost just through that than lockdown could ever save. And countless other costs too, not least those on quality of life: I only get 80-odd years on this planet, and rankle somewhat at having to spend one and a bit of one of the best of them unable to do much.
And having said all that, of course there are degrees of lockdown, and of course I'm not suggesting that nothing should have been done - just that far less should have been done. Far more should have been allowed to open (with schools top of the list), and reopenings should have happened much earlier (I'm thinking in particular of the dodgy data upon which Hancock insisted on a final four weeks of closures in June 2021). There was an almost religious attachment to lockdowns: if only we can sacrifice enough, hurt ourselves enough, God will favour us and the great plague will go away. They were a very blunt, very harmful tool.
Japan, a populous island nation with a similar climate to ours, had no national lockdowns and a much lower death rate. It’s not clear why Japan did much better. I note that they did close schools at times. Mask-wearing is and was also commonplace. Some have discussed a different, less individualistic culture than in the West. Others have suggested the more decentralised nature of Japanese government allowing prompt local responses. Other ideas are around the country’s focus on early detection and on public health education to support behaviour change.
What game is he playing? I get the rivalry between warlords aspect, and portraying his forces as stronger and more effective, but there's encouraging rivalry in your underlings and then having them just troll each other with insults.
They know what's coming and there is a need to position themselves as having done the right thing and the other faction as idiots. Rats in a sack.
Mr. kle4, I'm currently re-reading the first Black Company book, by Glen Cook, and rivalry between the Taken (wizard warlords, roughly, who are nominally on the same side) is a key feature.
Same has often been true in real history, as per Aetius, or the triumvirs.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Look at what is happening in Ukraine right now. Before Putin's Special Clusterfuck, the Ukes were a bit nebulous, half Russian, half Polish, half hmmm (Putin actually had a historical point, tho it does not begin to justify his hideous war)
Now, the Ukrainians are ABSOLUTELY a nation. They are the people who got attacked by Russia. They will be the people that endured that horrible war (inshallah). "Ukrainian-ness" will be off the dial by the end of all this
Putin will achieve the complete opposite of what he intended
I agree with the general point, but roots of their cultural identity go back much longer than you suggest. The 'half Russian, half Polish" bit describes only the ruling elites over the course of the last few centuries.
Ukrainian history and culture is multi faceted but it is pretty long established. You can trace a distinct Ukrainian identity for a good 1000 years. So this idea that Ukrainians are a rather nebulous group is a bit of a false narrative- it depends who you talked to. Both Russians in the north and Ukrainians in the south looked to Kievan Rus as their proto-state, but from the Mongol invasion onward, the Southern identity became and remained separate from the North and after Moscow took control in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century there was a distinct linguistic and cultural divide.
What has happened is the total rejection of anything Russian, even things- like Pushkin- that were previously respected. With Ukraine, Russia is an Empire, without it, it has "yet to find a role" and is derided as a bunch of loathsome barbarians who couldn´t even do pillaging right.
Glad to see that the Torygraph is having a pile-on with regards to the Hallett enquiry - Lockdown didn't save enough lives for the cost apparently.
That may be the case. May not. Either way, that's an assessment made with 2023 hindsight, not one that could have been made in 2020.
Perhaps it couldn't have been made in March 2020. But surely by June that year some effort should have been made to weigh costs and benefits against each other.
I can forgive the initial panicked lockdown in response to unknown circumstances. I can't really forgive keeping it there, to a greater or lesser extent, for the next 16 months. Nor the silencing of anyone who called for less lockdown.
You weigh up your own cost and benefits mate!
Lockdowns worked for me and I can prove it by the fact that I am still walking and talking.
My cost benefit analysis for late lockdowns in September 20 and December 20 can be counted in the fatality statistics for Autumn 2020 and Winter 2020/21.
We've been over before the links between lockdown and fatality statistics. I think they're weak. But put that aside: the point is that no effort was ever made to assess the costs of lockdown. This is pretty unique in the history of big government decisions. That is pretty much what the civil service is for. (So I'm not sure why you're suggesting I do my own cost benefit analysis.) We argue over HS2, for example, but considerable attempts are made to quantity the costs of it.
Costs of lockdown include trillions of pounds of debt - that much we know - money which could then be spent to save lives - but also the life chances of a generation. We know full well the negative impact of long periods of absence from school on life chances. There will be more life years lost just through that than lockdown could ever save. And countless other costs too, not least those on quality of life: I only get 80-odd years on this planet, and rankle somewhat at having to spend one and a bit of one of the best of them unable to do much.
And having said all that, of course there are degrees of lockdown, and of course I'm not suggesting that nothing should have been done - just that far less should have been done. Far more should have been allowed to open (with schools top of the list), and reopenings should have happened much earlier (I'm thinking in particular of the dodgy data upon which Hancock insisted on a final four weeks of closures in June 2021). There was an almost religious attachment to lockdowns: if only we can sacrifice enough, hurt ourselves enough, God will favour us and the great plague will go away. They were a very blunt, very harmful tool.
Japan, a populous island nation with a similar climate to ours, had no national lockdowns and a much lower death rate. It’s not clear why Japan did much better. I note that they did close schools at times. Mask-wearing is and was also commonplace. Some have discussed a different, less individualistic culture than in the West. Others have suggested the more decentralised nature of Japanese government allowing prompt local responses. Other ideas are around the country’s focus on early detection and on public health education to support behaviour change.
Also - much less obesity in Japan.
Whenever the Government tries to reduce obesity here, it’s attacked by the likes of the Telegraph for being a nanny state.
Glad to see that the Torygraph is having a pile-on with regards to the Hallett enquiry - Lockdown didn't save enough lives for the cost apparently.
That may be the case. May not. Either way, that's an assessment made with 2023 hindsight, not one that could have been made in 2020.
Perhaps it couldn't have been made in March 2020. But surely by June that year some effort should have been made to weigh costs and benefits against each other.
I can forgive the initial panicked lockdown in response to unknown circumstances. I can't really forgive keeping it there, to a greater or lesser extent, for the next 16 months. Nor the silencing of anyone who called for less lockdown.
You weigh up your own cost and benefits mate!
Lockdowns worked for me and I can prove it by the fact that I am still walking and talking.
My cost benefit analysis for late lockdowns in September 20 and December 20 can be counted in the fatality statistics for Autumn 2020 and Winter 2020/21.
We've been over before the links between lockdown and fatality statistics. I think they're weak. But put that aside: the point is that no effort was ever made to assess the costs of lockdown. This is pretty unique in the history of big government decisions. That is pretty much what the civil service is for. (So I'm not sure why you're suggesting I do my own cost benefit analysis.) We argue over HS2, for example, but considerable attempts are made to quantity the costs of it.
Costs of lockdown include trillions of pounds of debt - that much we know - money which could then be spent to save lives - but also the life chances of a generation. We know full well the negative impact of long periods of absence from school on life chances. There will be more life years lost just through that than lockdown could ever save. And countless other costs too, not least those on quality of life: I only get 80-odd years on this planet, and rankle somewhat at having to spend one and a bit of one of the best of them unable to do much.
And having said all that, of course there are degrees of lockdown, and of course I'm not suggesting that nothing should have been done - just that far less should have been done. Far more should have been allowed to open (with schools top of the list), and reopenings should have happened much earlier (I'm thinking in particular of the dodgy data upon which Hancock insisted on a final four weeks of closures in June 2021). There was an almost religious attachment to lockdowns: if only we can sacrifice enough, hurt ourselves enough, God will favour us and the great plague will go away. They were a very blunt, very harmful tool.
Japan, a populous island nation with a similar climate to ours, had no national lockdowns and a much lower death rate. It’s not clear why Japan did much better. I note that they did close schools at times. Mask-wearing is and was also commonplace. Some have discussed a different, less individualistic culture than in the West. Others have suggested the more decentralised nature of Japanese government allowing prompt local responses. Other ideas are around the country’s focus on early detection and on public health education to support behaviour change.
Also - much less obesity in Japan.
Whenever the Government tries to reduce obesity here, it’s attacked by the likes of the Telegraph for being a nanny state.
It's possible to think that less obesity is good and also that it's not the state's business to bring this about.
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Just checked, the weight of my Peugeot is 1185 Kg. The main issue is like for like EV cars are rather heavier than their ICE counterparts so assuming the same "mix" means more road degradation, structural impact on bridges; car parks etc. Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
The new BMW iX SUV, is 2,500-2,700kg, depending on spec. The heavy one has a 400-mile range.
The new Hummer EV isn’t coming to the UK - because you’re not allowed to drive it on a car licence, it’s over 3,500kg.
D Day doesn’t have the same resonance in Russia/Ukraine.
For example can you tell me when the siege of Leningrad ended without looking it up.
But it would have resonance for the western backers Ukraine is relying on and would be another way for Ukrainians to say they're casting aside the Russian yoke.
What game is he playing? I get the rivalry between warlords aspect, and portraying his forces as stronger and more effective, but there's encouraging rivalry in your underlings and then having them just troll each other with insults.
I say let them get on with fighting against each other!
Meanwhile, the Ukranians are definitely on the offensive, but there’s a big blackout and people are being told not to share stuff online.
I appear to have been a victim of this (wooohooo)...I am surprised this hasn't been a much much bigger story, given the vast number of people whose details have been leaked and that how crap Capita are all round (including big public sector contracts).
Capita hack: 90 organisations report data breaches to watchdog
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
(The Tesla Model Y is around 2t.)
I seemed to remember in some states in the US, the F150 is by miles the biggest selling vehicle. Not just the biggest selling truck, the biggest selling vehicle. Its basically the only thing that makes Ford big money, and enables them to stay afloat.
We need to tax that sort of vehicle to the hilt in the UK, it's an electric powered pothole generator.
There's quite a lot of ICE Range Rovers around and they weigh about 2.5 tons.
2.5 -> 3 tonnes is double the wear when you go to 4th power...
My main point is I don't think weight is considered enough in road tax. Obviously we need HGVs and tractors for moving food and goods around but we don't need mahoosize cars and the EV versions are heavier than their ICE equivalents. The CO2 element can be taxed by fuel duties as that'll vary depending on mileage. But fuel (Whether it's petrol, diesel or lithium ions) whilst it will perfectly match CO2 generation will be a very poor match for road wear generation. A road tax based on mileage (Between MOTs say) multiplied by kerb weight would be the best fit to match up with road wear.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Some are just invented, like Belgium.
Doesn't apply to Belgium, but straight lines on a map are normally a dead giveaway for 'artificial' countries.
Why is Belgium any more artificial than most countries? The only countries that aren't artificial or 'just invented' are the ones comprising of a single island
Is Barbados (one island) a more natural country than Trinidad and Tobago (two islands) or Haiti (half an island)? Countries, in common with other cultural phenomena like money or language, are only real because they exist in people's heads. I'm not sure that terms like "artificial" are meaningful when they're applied here.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
(The Tesla Model Y is around 2t.)
I seemed to remember in some states in the US, the F150 is by miles the biggest selling vehicle. Not just the biggest selling truck, the biggest selling vehicle. Its basically the only thing that makes Ford big money, and enables them to stay afloat.
We need to tax that sort of vehicle to the hilt in the UK, it's an electric powered pothole generator.
There's quite a lot of ICE Range Rovers around and they weigh about 2.5 tons.
2.5 -> 3 tonnes is double the wear when you go to 4th power...
My main point is I don't think weight is considered enough in road tax. Obviously we need HGVs and tractors for moving food and goods around but we don't need mahoosize cars and the EV versions are heavier than their ICE equivalents. The CO2 element can be taxed by fuel duties as that'll vary depending on mileage. But fuel (Whether it's petrol, diesel or lithium ions) whilst it will perfectly match CO2 generation will be a very poor match for road wear generation. A road tax based on mileage (Between MOTs say) multiplied by kerb weight would be the best fit to match up with road wear.
Quick glance tells me the new electric Astra is 400kg heavier than the none electric versions.
Incidentally the second Secretary-General of NATO, Paul-Henri Spaak, is the most Winston Churchill looking fellow not to be named Churchill I've ever seen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-Henri_Spaak
The bastard child of Winston Churchill and Reginald Maudling?
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
Sparked off by the carpark collapse in NY a week or so back. It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous. "The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
(The Tesla Model Y is around 2t.)
I seemed to remember in some states in the US, the F150 is by miles the biggest selling vehicle. Not just the biggest selling truck, the biggest selling vehicle. Its basically the only thing that makes Ford big money, and enables them to stay afloat.
We need to tax that sort of vehicle to the hilt in the UK, it's an electric powered pothole generator.
There's quite a lot of ICE Range Rovers around and they weigh about 2.5 tons.
2.5 -> 3 tonnes is double the wear when you go to 4th power...
My main point is I don't think weight is considered enough in road tax. Obviously we need HGVs and tractors for moving food and goods around but we don't need mahoosize cars and the EV versions are heavier than their ICE equivalents. The CO2 element can be taxed by fuel duties as that'll vary depending on mileage. But fuel (Whether it's petrol, diesel or lithium ions) whilst it will perfectly match CO2 generation will be a very poor match for road wear generation. A road tax based on mileage (Between MOTs say) multiplied by kerb weight would be the best fit to match up with road wear.
Yes, road wear is proportional to the 4th power of axle weight - which means a small difference in weight makes for a big difference in road wear.
Taxing EVs according to the 4th power of weight, might be a good way to go forward. Let a Leaf continue to pay no road tax, but let a BMW iX long range (2,700kg) pay a couple of grand a year in tax.
Re the Anglo-Saxons, if we can’t call them “Anglo-Saxons” then what do we call the Germanic invaders who took over the country in the 4th-6th century, displacing Romano-Brits and Celts?
Coz that definitely happened. We can see from place-name evidence. Everywhere
Crikey, yes. Yet again some guy posting on a discussion site completely outwits the academic establishment by spotting something all the eggheads had missed. There'll be some red faces in our universities today. Thank heaven for the Internet.
I’m actually not disputing the Woke academics here on the term (I’ve always felt “Anglo-Saxon” is slightly clumsy). I’m saying the ARGUMENT is a Woke irrelevance. In the 4th-6th century a bunch of Germanic types with a new culture and language came over to Britain and altered our gene pool and changed all the place names. That indisputably happened (you can call it an invasion or not, that’s not my point)
These people need a name. If it can’t be Anglo-Saxon then what will that name be?
As I say, only “early English” is short and pithy enough to work but that will just get the lefties even angrier
The crux of the issue, when not misrepresented by ignorant commentators, is whether the label refers to a distinct ethnic group. It does not, despite the beliefs of some who would rather it did. The reason why they would rather it did fits into the reason for it being a relevant question. Those who would seek to build their politics on a pillar of racial purity or superiority have a fatal flaw in the foundations of their ideology.
Sadly these people still exist and their reaction is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.
I think that a group of people that one can call Anglo-Saxons, or English, had become a distinct ethnic group, by the middle of the 10th century, and I see nothing in the Reddit article that conflicts with that.
That's very different from saying that these people formed the basis of some kind of pure or superior race.
The same way I'd say that Germans existed at this time. They just weren't the kind of people that 19th Century German nationalists thought they were.
And do you have any evidence for this distinct ethnicity? It doesn't seem very likely to me, given the continued cultural and linguistic diversity even within England, and what we know of extant genetic differences today. There were and still are many Englands within the borders of England. The wider you cast your net to catch of England, the more readily you will scoop up that which is not and never has been England. Do you think Cumbrians were closer to Sussex folk or to people from Strathclyde? How much did the people of Whitby have in common with Oksbøl versus Oxford?
I have serious doubts about whether you could ever draw a genetic line around England and only England at any point in all of England's history.
And if given the above is true, what use could there be for persisting with the myth if not to make political mischief today? In whose interest is it to link a nation to a fictional genetic stock, other than those whose ideology is filtration and exclusion?
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Look at what is happening in Ukraine right now. Before Putin's Special Clusterfuck, the Ukes were a bit nebulous, half Russian, half Polish, half hmmm (Putin actually had a historical point, tho it does not begin to justify his hideous war)
Now, the Ukrainians are ABSOLUTELY a nation. They are the people who got attacked by Russia. They will be the people that endured that horrible war (inshallah). "Ukrainian-ness" will be off the dial by the end of all this
Putin will achieve the complete opposite of what he intended
I agree with the general point, but roots of their cultural identity go back much longer than you suggest. The 'half Russian, half Polish" bit describes only the ruling elites over the course of the last few centuries.
Ukrainian history and culture is multi faceted but it is pretty long established. You can trace a distinct Ukrainian identity for a good 1000 years. So this idea that Ukrainians are a rather nebulous group is a bit of a false narrative- it depends who you talked to. Both Russians in the north and Ukrainians in the south looked to Kievan Rus as their proto-state, but from the Mongol invasion onward, the Southern identity became and remained separate from the North and after Moscow took control in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century there was a distinct linguistic and cultural divide.
What has happened is the total rejection of anything Russian, even things- like Pushkin- that were previously respected. With Ukraine, Russia is an Empire, without it, it has "yet to find a role" and is derided as a bunch of loathsome barbarians who couldn´t even do pillaging right.
To quote a former British ambassador to Moscow; 'Britain had an empire, Russia was an empire.'
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast. 2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX. 3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen. 4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome. 5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government. 6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out, 7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
I can’t find the link now, but that big genetic study of the UK a few years back found that the big genetic variation is between Orkney/Shetland and everywhere else. England, Wales, Northern Ireland and most of Scotland are all mixed up, but the Orkney and Shetland Islands retain distinct Scandinavian genetic markers.
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Just checked, the weight of my Peugeot is 1185 Kg. The main issue is like for like EV cars are rather heavier than their ICE counterparts so assuming the same "mix" means more road degradation, structural impact on bridges; car parks etc. Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
The new BMW iX SUV, is 2,500-2,700kg, depending on spec. The heavy one has a 400-mile range.
The new Hummer EV isn’t coming to the UK - because you’re not allowed to drive it on a car licence, it’s over 3,500kg.
For us oldsters when we passed our test we could jump straight into a 7.5 tonne Ford Cargo truck at aged just 17.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Some are just invented, like Belgium.
Doesn't apply to Belgium, but straight lines on a map are normally a dead giveaway for 'artificial' countries.
Why is Belgium any more artificial than most countries? The only countries that aren't artificial or 'just invented' are the ones comprising of a single island
Is Barbados (one island) a more natural country than Trinidad and Tobago (two islands) or Haiti (half an island)? Countries, in common with other cultural phenomena like money or language, are only real because they exist in people's heads. I'm not sure that terms like "artificial" are meaningful when they're applied here.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Some are just invented, like Belgium.
Doesn't apply to Belgium, but straight lines on a map are normally a dead giveaway for 'artificial' countries.
Why is Belgium any more artificial than most countries? The only countries that aren't artificial or 'just invented' are the ones comprising of a single island
Is Barbados (one island) a more natural country than Trinidad and Tobago (two islands) or Haiti (half an island)? Countries, in common with other cultural phenomena like money or language, are only real because they exist in people's heads. I'm not sure that terms like "artificial" are meaningful when they're applied here.
Tobago is proper Caribbean.
Trinidad is a bit of Venezuela that fell off....
If you've been to Trinidad Carnival you might come to a different view...
Incidentally the second Secretary-General of NATO, Paul-Henri Spaak, is the most Winston Churchill looking fellow not to be named Churchill I've ever seen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-Henri_Spaak
I like a face that doesn't give up. With most people, it goes down to the chin and no farther. With people like Spaak or Churchill, it invades the Sudetenland of the neck, and Blitzkriegs all the way down to the Vistula of the collarbone. A face that extends from the crown of the head and down to the nipples is the Tausendjähriges Reich of the face game.
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Just checked, the weight of my Peugeot is 1185 Kg. The main issue is like for like EV cars are rather heavier than their ICE counterparts so assuming the same "mix" means more road degradation, structural impact on bridges; car parks etc. Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
The new BMW iX SUV, is 2,500-2,700kg, depending on spec. The heavy one has a 400-mile range.
The new Hummer EV isn’t coming to the UK - because you’re not allowed to drive it on a car licence, it’s over 3,500kg.
For us oldsters when we passed our test we could jump straight into a 7.5 tonne Ford Cargo truck at aged just 17.
They changed it in 1996, thanks to an EU harmonisation directive.
I passed my test at 17 in 1995, so am one of the last to have the 7.5t endorsement, with grandfather rights for life. Not that I’ve ever actually used it, I managed to move house with a 3.5t truck.
Surely bigger cars are more dangerous to other road users? Should there be a different speed limit for cars over a certain weight?
National speed limits for vans and lorries are different to cars, so yeah a 3 tonne hummer should probably have the same limit as vans. You can't grade differently on limited roads though as the limit there is... the limit.
I passed my test at 17 in 1995, so am one of the last to have the 7.5t endorsement, with grandfather rights for life. Not that I’ve ever actually used it, I managed to move house with a 3.5t truck.
7.5t GVW. Most trucks weigh about 4 tons leaving 3.5t cargo capacity
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Just checked, the weight of my Peugeot is 1185 Kg. The main issue is like for like EV cars are rather heavier than their ICE counterparts so assuming the same "mix" means more road degradation, structural impact on bridges; car parks etc. Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
The new BMW iX SUV, is 2,500-2,700kg, depending on spec. The heavy one has a 400-mile range.
The new Hummer EV isn’t coming to the UK - because you’re not allowed to drive it on a car licence, it’s over 3,500kg.
For us oldsters when we passed our test we could jump straight into a 7.5 tonne Ford Cargo truck at aged just 17.
They changed it in 1996, thanks to an EU harmonisation directive.
I passed my test at 17 in 1995, so am one of the last to have the 7.5t endorsement, with grandfather rights for life. Not that I’ve ever actually used it, I managed to move house with a 3.5t truck.
What you're allowed to drive is one of the true millenial/gen X dividing lines. Didn't it get changed recently though ?
Around 1996 it probably looked ok as the new laws affected 17 year olds and who'd want them to drive huge powerful vehicles, but some of us with the nixxed licenses are in our early 40s now.
A former intelligence official turned whistleblower has given Congress and the Intelligence Community Inspector General extensive classified information about deeply covert programs that he says possess retrieved intact and partially intact craft of non-human origin.
The information, he says, has been illegally withheld from Congress, and he filed a complaint alleging that he suffered illegal retaliation for his confidential disclosures, reported here for the first time.
Other intelligence officials, both active and retired, with knowledge of these programs through their work in various agencies, have independently provided similar, corroborating information, both on and off the record.
The whistleblower, David Charles Grusch, 36, a decorated former combat officer in Afghanistan, is a veteran of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). He served as the reconnaissance office’s representative to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force from 2019-2021. From late 2021 to July 2022, he was the NGA’s co-lead for UAP analysis and its representative to the task force.
Re the Anglo-Saxons, if we can’t call them “Anglo-Saxons” then what do we call the Germanic invaders who took over the country in the 4th-6th century, displacing Romano-Brits and Celts?
Coz that definitely happened. We can see from place-name evidence. Everywhere
Crikey, yes. Yet again some guy posting on a discussion site completely outwits the academic establishment by spotting something all the eggheads had missed. There'll be some red faces in our universities today. Thank heaven for the Internet.
I’m actually not disputing the Woke academics here on the term (I’ve always felt “Anglo-Saxon” is slightly clumsy). I’m saying the ARGUMENT is a Woke irrelevance. In the 4th-6th century a bunch of Germanic types with a new culture and language came over to Britain and altered our gene pool and changed all the place names. That indisputably happened (you can call it an invasion or not, that’s not my point)
These people need a name. If it can’t be Anglo-Saxon then what will that name be?
As I say, only “early English” is short and pithy enough to work but that will just get the lefties even angrier
The crux of the issue, when not misrepresented by ignorant commentators, is whether the label refers to a distinct ethnic group. It does not, despite the beliefs of some who would rather it did. The reason why they would rather it did fits into the reason for it being a relevant question. Those who would seek to build their politics on a pillar of racial purity or superiority have a fatal flaw in the foundations of their ideology.
Sadly these people still exist and their reaction is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.
I think that a group of people that one can call Anglo-Saxons, or English, had become a distinct ethnic group, by the middle of the 10th century, and I see nothing in the Reddit article that conflicts with that.
That's very different from saying that these people formed the basis of some kind of pure or superior race.
The same way I'd say that Germans existed at this time. They just weren't the kind of people that 19th Century German nationalists thought they were.
And do you have any evidence for this distinct ethnicity? It doesn't seem very likely to me, given the continued cultural and linguistic diversity even within England, and what we know of extant genetic differences today. There were and still are many Englands within the borders of England. The wider you cast your net to catch of England, the more readily you will scoop up that which is not and never has been England. Do you think Cumbrians were closer to Sussex folk or to people from Strathclyde? How much did the people of Whitby have in common with Oksbøl versus Oxford?
I have serious doubts about whether you could ever draw a genetic line around England and only England at any point in all of England's history.
And if given the above is true, what use could there be for persisting with the myth if not to make political mischief today? In whose interest is it to link a nation to a fictional genetic stock, other than those whose ideology is filtration and exclusion?
A Royal House whose kings called themselves Kings of England. England would be conquered in the future, but England never ceased to exist as an entity, after 960. They had a common language, a common literature, a common religion, and a common enemy.
These are what create an ethnic group. Claiming that the Anglo-Saxons did not exist as an ethnic group is like claiming that Poles, Germans, Ukrainians etc. did not.
Re the Anglo-Saxons, if we can’t call them “Anglo-Saxons” then what do we call the Germanic invaders who took over the country in the 4th-6th century, displacing Romano-Brits and Celts?
Coz that definitely happened. We can see from place-name evidence. Everywhere
Crikey, yes. Yet again some guy posting on a discussion site completely outwits the academic establishment by spotting something all the eggheads had missed. There'll be some red faces in our universities today. Thank heaven for the Internet.
I’m actually not disputing the Woke academics here on the term (I’ve always felt “Anglo-Saxon” is slightly clumsy). I’m saying the ARGUMENT is a Woke irrelevance. In the 4th-6th century a bunch of Germanic types with a new culture and language came over to Britain and altered our gene pool and changed all the place names. That indisputably happened (you can call it an invasion or not, that’s not my point)
These people need a name. If it can’t be Anglo-Saxon then what will that name be?
As I say, only “early English” is short and pithy enough to work but that will just get the lefties even angrier
The crux of the issue, when not misrepresented by ignorant commentators, is whether the label refers to a distinct ethnic group. It does not, despite the beliefs of some who would rather it did. The reason why they would rather it did fits into the reason for it being a relevant question. Those who would seek to build their politics on a pillar of racial purity or superiority have a fatal flaw in the foundations of their ideology.
Sadly these people still exist and their reaction is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.
I think that a group of people that one can call Anglo-Saxons, or English, had become a distinct ethnic group, by the middle of the 10th century, and I see nothing in the Reddit article that conflicts with that.
That's very different from saying that these people formed the basis of some kind of pure or superior race.
The same way I'd say that Germans existed at this time. They just weren't the kind of people that 19th Century German nationalists thought they were.
And do you have any evidence for this distinct ethnicity? It doesn't seem very likely to me, given the continued cultural and linguistic diversity even within England, and what we know of extant genetic differences today. There were and still are many Englands within the borders of England. The wider you cast your net to catch of England, the more readily you will scoop up that which is not and never has been England. Do you think Cumbrians were closer to Sussex folk or to people from Strathclyde? How much did the people of Whitby have in common with Oksbøl versus Oxford?
I have serious doubts about whether you could ever draw a genetic line around England and only England at any point in all of England's history.
And if given the above is true, what use could there be for persisting with the myth if not to make political mischief today? In whose interest is it to link a nation to a fictional genetic stock, other than those whose ideology is filtration and exclusion?
You’d have a point if you weren’t completely wrong
A former intelligence official turned whistleblower has given Congress and the Intelligence Community Inspector General extensive classified information about deeply covert programs that he says possess retrieved intact and partially intact craft of non-human origin.
The information, he says, has been illegally withheld from Congress, and he filed a complaint alleging that he suffered illegal retaliation for his confidential disclosures, reported here for the first time.
Other intelligence officials, both active and retired, with knowledge of these programs through their work in various agencies, have independently provided similar, corroborating information, both on and off the record.
The whistleblower, David Charles Grusch, 36, a decorated former combat officer in Afghanistan, is a veteran of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). He served as the reconnaissance office’s representative to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force from 2019-2021. From late 2021 to July 2022, he was the NGA’s co-lead for UAP analysis and its representative to the task force.
Re the Anglo-Saxons, if we can’t call them “Anglo-Saxons” then what do we call the Germanic invaders who took over the country in the 4th-6th century, displacing Romano-Brits and Celts?
Coz that definitely happened. We can see from place-name evidence. Everywhere
Crikey, yes. Yet again some guy posting on a discussion site completely outwits the academic establishment by spotting something all the eggheads had missed. There'll be some red faces in our universities today. Thank heaven for the Internet.
I’m actually not disputing the Woke academics here on the term (I’ve always felt “Anglo-Saxon” is slightly clumsy). I’m saying the ARGUMENT is a Woke irrelevance. In the 4th-6th century a bunch of Germanic types with a new culture and language came over to Britain and altered our gene pool and changed all the place names. That indisputably happened (you can call it an invasion or not, that’s not my point)
These people need a name. If it can’t be Anglo-Saxon then what will that name be?
As I say, only “early English” is short and pithy enough to work but that will just get the lefties even angrier
The crux of the issue, when not misrepresented by ignorant commentators, is whether the label refers to a distinct ethnic group. It does not, despite the beliefs of some who would rather it did. The reason why they would rather it did fits into the reason for it being a relevant question. Those who would seek to build their politics on a pillar of racial purity or superiority have a fatal flaw in the foundations of their ideology.
Sadly these people still exist and their reaction is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.
I think that a group of people that one can call Anglo-Saxons, or English, had become a distinct ethnic group, by the middle of the 10th century, and I see nothing in the Reddit article that conflicts with that.
That's very different from saying that these people formed the basis of some kind of pure or superior race.
The same way I'd say that Germans existed at this time. They just weren't the kind of people that 19th Century German nationalists thought they were.
And do you have any evidence for this distinct ethnicity? It doesn't seem very likely to me, given the continued cultural and linguistic diversity even within England, and what we know of extant genetic differences today. There were and still are many Englands within the borders of England. The wider you cast your net to catch of England, the more readily you will scoop up that which is not and never has been England. Do you think Cumbrians were closer to Sussex folk or to people from Strathclyde? How much did the people of Whitby have in common with Oksbøl versus Oxford?
I have serious doubts about whether you could ever draw a genetic line around England and only England at any point in all of England's history.
And if given the above is true, what use could there be for persisting with the myth if not to make political mischief today? In whose interest is it to link a nation to a fictional genetic stock, other than those whose ideology is filtration and exclusion?
You’d have a point if you weren’t completely wrong
Tell me what we're looking at and which of my points it contradicts.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Look at what is happening in Ukraine right now. Before Putin's Special Clusterfuck, the Ukes were a bit nebulous, half Russian, half Polish, half hmmm (Putin actually had a historical point, tho it does not begin to justify his hideous war)
Now, the Ukrainians are ABSOLUTELY a nation. They are the people who got attacked by Russia. They will be the people that endured that horrible war (inshallah). "Ukrainian-ness" will be off the dial by the end of all this
Putin will achieve the complete opposite of what he intended
I agree with the general point, but roots of their cultural identity go back much longer than you suggest. The 'half Russian, half Polish" bit describes only the ruling elites over the course of the last few centuries.
Ukrainian history and culture is multi faceted but it is pretty long established. You can trace a distinct Ukrainian identity for a good 1000 years. So this idea that Ukrainians are a rather nebulous group is a bit of a false narrative- it depends who you talked to. Both Russians in the north and Ukrainians in the south looked to Kievan Rus as their proto-state, but from the Mongol invasion onward, the Southern identity became and remained separate from the North and after Moscow took control in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century there was a distinct linguistic and cultural divide.
What has happened is the total rejection of anything Russian, even things- like Pushkin- that were previously respected. With Ukraine, Russia is an Empire, without it, it has "yet to find a role" and is derided as a bunch of loathsome barbarians who couldn´t even do pillaging right.
You're correct about the much longer history.
Leon was not wrong, though, to point out what's now Ukraine was variously partitioned between the Russian, Polish Lithuanian, and Austria Hungarian empires over the course of several centuries. And the idea of the modern nation state has its roots only in the nineteenth century.
The first real attempt at building a Ukrainian nation state in the modern sense - quickly crushed - was in the aftermath of WWI. And then Stalin, and Holodomor, and Hitler. And Stalin again.
Ukraine was a fairly cohesive nation after the Maidan revolution. All Putin has done is guarantee it will never go back.
Surely bigger cars are more dangerous to other road users? Should there be a different speed limit for cars over a certain weight?
National speed limits for vans and lorries are different to cars, so yeah a 3 tonne hummer should probably have the same limit as vans. You can't grade differently on limited roads though as the limit there is... the limit.
I don't care too much about people doing 75mph on a motorway if it isn't too busy but I remember being incensed when in the Lake district at people driving way too fast on small winding roads after dark.
Does anyone have a clear idea about how much freedom of expression there actually is in Russia? We hear periodic dissenting voices from both extreme nationalists critical of the government (essentially "Stop messing about, kill them all") and more cautious types disagreeing with them, and even statements from people in prison like Navalny. If Putin was a classical dictator, he'd lock Prigozhin and anyone else expressing dissent up. But it's clearly not an open society in any recognisable form.
So is the position that the Government has the ability to lock up anyone on more or less trumped-up charges, but it's unpredictable when they'll think it wise to do so? Thus Prigozhin gets away with it because Putin doesn't want the Wagner gruop mutinying?
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Just checked, the weight of my Peugeot is 1185 Kg. The main issue is like for like EV cars are rather heavier than their ICE counterparts so assuming the same "mix" means more road degradation, structural impact on bridges; car parks etc. Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
The new BMW iX SUV, is 2,500-2,700kg, depending on spec. The heavy one has a 400-mile range.
The new Hummer EV isn’t coming to the UK - because you’re not allowed to drive it on a car licence, it’s over 3,500kg.
For us oldsters when we passed our test we could jump straight into a 7.5 tonne Ford Cargo truck at aged just 17.
They changed it in 1996, thanks to an EU harmonisation directive.
I passed my test at 17 in 1995, so am one of the last to have the 7.5t endorsement, with grandfather rights for life. Not that I’ve ever actually used it, I managed to move house with a 3.5t truck.
What you're allowed to drive is one of the true millenial/gen X dividing lines.
The biggest issue is actually not the 7.5t truck, which most of us may only ever use once or twice, but towing trailers with cars, which is a much more common persuit.
If you want to tow a race car, a caravan, a horse box, a glider, or many other types of sporting equipment, it’s almost impossible with a post-1996 3.5t licence. A small trailer that you’d get in Halford’s is about all that’s allowed.
The trick is to find a relatively lightweight car with a high tow weight, such as a Golf TDi, and if you have a regular trailer full of equipment, re-weight it down to what it actually carries.
Re the Anglo-Saxons, if we can’t call them “Anglo-Saxons” then what do we call the Germanic invaders who took over the country in the 4th-6th century, displacing Romano-Brits and Celts?
Coz that definitely happened. We can see from place-name evidence. Everywhere
Crikey, yes. Yet again some guy posting on a discussion site completely outwits the academic establishment by spotting something all the eggheads had missed. There'll be some red faces in our universities today. Thank heaven for the Internet.
I’m actually not disputing the Woke academics here on the term (I’ve always felt “Anglo-Saxon” is slightly clumsy). I’m saying the ARGUMENT is a Woke irrelevance. In the 4th-6th century a bunch of Germanic types with a new culture and language came over to Britain and altered our gene pool and changed all the place names. That indisputably happened (you can call it an invasion or not, that’s not my point)
These people need a name. If it can’t be Anglo-Saxon then what will that name be?
As I say, only “early English” is short and pithy enough to work but that will just get the lefties even angrier
The crux of the issue, when not misrepresented by ignorant commentators, is whether the label refers to a distinct ethnic group. It does not, despite the beliefs of some who would rather it did. The reason why they would rather it did fits into the reason for it being a relevant question. Those who would seek to build their politics on a pillar of racial purity or superiority have a fatal flaw in the foundations of their ideology.
Sadly these people still exist and their reaction is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.
I think that a group of people that one can call Anglo-Saxons, or English, had become a distinct ethnic group, by the middle of the 10th century, and I see nothing in the Reddit article that conflicts with that.
That's very different from saying that these people formed the basis of some kind of pure or superior race.
The same way I'd say that Germans existed at this time. They just weren't the kind of people that 19th Century German nationalists thought they were.
And do you have any evidence for this distinct ethnicity? It doesn't seem very likely to me, given the continued cultural and linguistic diversity even within England, and what we know of extant genetic differences today. There were and still are many Englands within the borders of England. The wider you cast your net to catch of England, the more readily you will scoop up that which is not and never has been England. Do you think Cumbrians were closer to Sussex folk or to people from Strathclyde? How much did the people of Whitby have in common with Oksbøl versus Oxford?
I have serious doubts about whether you could ever draw a genetic line around England and only England at any point in all of England's history.
And if given the above is true, what use could there be for persisting with the myth if not to make political mischief today? In whose interest is it to link a nation to a fictional genetic stock, other than those whose ideology is filtration and exclusion?
You’d have a point if you weren’t completely wrong
So, you're saying that France and the UK are - genetically - one country?
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast. 2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX. 3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen. 4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome. 5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government. 6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out, 7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
No it doesn't, a moderate centre right government would be PP led with Citizens support. Not a PP minority government reliant on confidence and supply from the hard right Vox to stay in power,
Based on the above only a PP/PSOE grand coalition could prevent Spain getting a hard right government
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
And the SUV-ness is a big problem, electric or not.
The Telegraph really is a blooming awful parody of a newspaper these days. At some level, I blame their decision to stay broadsheet when everyone else went compact.
The Guardian is definitely moving downmarket too - lots of anecdotal articles about sex and marriage and everyday life, with hard domestic and foreign news other than the big stories literally down the end of the web page.
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast. 2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX. 3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen. 4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome. 5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government. 6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out, 7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
No it doesn't, a moderate centre right government would be PP led with Citizens support. Not a PP minority government reliant on confidence and supply from the hard right Vox to stay in power
Aren't Citizens very likely to get wiped out at this election? Although I haven't looked at the figures in detail yet. Just about to do so.
The Viking invasions were probably the moment the English began to feel REALLY English. A people
There’s nothing like being attacked to make you the victims band together, and bond into a team
Indeed. I'd say most nations begin this way.
Look at what is happening in Ukraine right now. Before Putin's Special Clusterfuck, the Ukes were a bit nebulous, half Russian, half Polish, half hmmm (Putin actually had a historical point, tho it does not begin to justify his hideous war)
Now, the Ukrainians are ABSOLUTELY a nation. They are the people who got attacked by Russia. They will be the people that endured that horrible war (inshallah). "Ukrainian-ness" will be off the dial by the end of all this
Putin will achieve the complete opposite of what he intended
I agree with the general point, but roots of their cultural identity go back much longer than you suggest. The 'half Russian, half Polish" bit describes only the ruling elites over the course of the last few centuries.
Ukrainian history and culture is multi faceted but it is pretty long established. You can trace a distinct Ukrainian identity for a good 1000 years. So this idea that Ukrainians are a rather nebulous group is a bit of a false narrative- it depends who you talked to. Both Russians in the north and Ukrainians in the south looked to Kievan Rus as their proto-state, but from the Mongol invasion onward, the Southern identity became and remained separate from the North and after Moscow took control in the eighteenth and early nineteenth century there was a distinct linguistic and cultural divide.
What has happened is the total rejection of anything Russian, even things- like Pushkin- that were previously respected. With Ukraine, Russia is an Empire, without it, it has "yet to find a role" and is derided as a bunch of loathsome barbarians who couldn´t even do pillaging right.
You're correct about the much longer history.
Leon was not wrong, though, to point out what's now Ukraine was variously partitioned between the Russian, Polish Lithuanian, and Austria Hungarian empires over the course of several centuries. And the idea of the modern nation state has its roots only in the nineteenth century.
The first real attempt at building a Ukrainian nation state in the modern sense - quickly crushed - was in the aftermath of WWI. And then Stalin, and Holodomor, and Hitler. And Stalin again.
Ukraine was a fairly cohesive nation after the Maidan revolution. All Putin has done is guarantee it will never go back.
The other point that is so obviously missed by Putin, who blames the originators of the Soviet state for separating Russia and Ukraine, is why Ukraine was made a separate Soviet state in the first place. I doubt it was because Lenin felt like being generous.
Tens of thousands of British Airways, BBC and Boots staff may have had their personal details stolen following a suspected Russia-linked cyber attack, The Telegraph can disclose.
The hack is linked to BA’s payroll provider, Zellis, and other companies that work with the company have also had their information stolen...Zellis provides payroll support services to hundreds of companies in the UK...
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast. 2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX. 3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen. 4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome. 5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government. 6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out, 7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
Here's what might be the crucial poll, though.
The Too Spanish Didn't Read is that if the two Corbynite parties can agree a joint ticket, they get a lot more seats than if they run against each other. (The Spanish system isn't entirely proportional, especially for small parties). PP still ahead, but probably unable to get a majority together. (And when push comes to shove, there would be a price to be paid if they do get into la cama with Vox.)
Why is it that lefties insist on falling out with each other, even when it's clearly not in their electoral interests?
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast. 2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX. 3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen. 4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome. 5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government. 6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out, 7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
No it doesn't, a moderate centre right government would be PP led with Citizens support. Not a PP minority government reliant on confidence and supply from the hard right Vox to stay in power
Aren't Citizens very likely to get wiped out at this election? Although I haven't looked at the figures in detail yet. Just about to do so.
They are not even contesting it as their poll rating was so bad
Funnily enough, I don't remember this being an issue for the Telegraph as SUVs became widespread. But yes, vehicles both fossil-fuelled and electric are indeed becoming too heavy. I'll be OK with my Leaf (1,580 kg) but owners of a new Range Rover (2,505+ kg) will have to find somewhere else to park.
Just checked, the weight of my Peugeot is 1185 Kg. The main issue is like for like EV cars are rather heavier than their ICE counterparts so assuming the same "mix" means more road degradation, structural impact on bridges; car parks etc. Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
The new BMW iX SUV, is 2,500-2,700kg, depending on spec. The heavy one has a 400-mile range.
The new Hummer EV isn’t coming to the UK - because you’re not allowed to drive it on a car licence, it’s over 3,500kg.
For us oldsters when we passed our test we could jump straight into a 7.5 tonne Ford Cargo truck at aged just 17.
They changed it in 1996, thanks to an EU harmonisation directive.
I passed my test at 17 in 1995, so am one of the last to have the 7.5t endorsement, with grandfather rights for life. Not that I’ve ever actually used it, I managed to move house with a 3.5t truck.
I had resisted the call to drive them when I managed a fleet of drivers and vehicles back in the 1990s. I was not a lorry driver! However one of the Cargos was called in for inspection by VOSA. I couldn't afford a man and a vehicle off the road for half a day so I reluctantly took it to the inspection site in Llantrisant myself. It was very pleasant to drive. Much easier than either the 3.5 tonne box Transits and 5 tonne Iveco Dailys. I chose to drive them fairly regularly after that.
P.S. I don't think anyone who passed their test in a Mini 1000 should be immediately qualified to drive a 7.5 tonne killing machine! Or a 3,5 tonne plus e-Humvee.
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast. 2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX. 3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen. 4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome. 5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government. 6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out, 7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
No it doesn't, a moderate centre right government would be PP led with Citizens support. Not a PP minority government reliant on confidence and supply from the hard right Vox to stay in power
Spain does do minority governments, though, in a way we don't.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
And the SUV-ness is a big problem, electric or not.
The Telegraph really is a blooming awful parody of a newspaper these days. At some level, I blame their decision to stay broadsheet when everyone else went compact.
The Guardian is definitely moving downmarket too - lots of anecdotal articles about sex and marriage and everyday life, with hard domestic and foreign news other than the big stories literally down the end of the web page.
They’re all doing it now sadly, tittle-tattle and click-bait headlines are cheap to produce and generate advertising revenue. Hard journalism is expensive and often not sexy. The broadsheets are slowly turning tabloid.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
And the SUV-ness is a big problem, electric or not.
The Telegraph really is a blooming awful parody of a newspaper these days. At some level, I blame their decision to stay broadsheet when everyone else went compact.
The Guardian is definitely moving downmarket too - lots of anecdotal articles about sex and marriage and everyday life, with hard domestic and foreign news other than the big stories literally down the end of the web page.
They’re all doing it now sadly, tittle-tattle and click-bait headlines are cheap to produce and generate advertising revenue. Hard journalism is expensive and often not sexy. The broadsheets are slowly turning tabloid.
I believe I am correct that the Times is now the only newspaper that has a full time dedicated investigative journalist team, who are employed solely to work on stories that will require many months of work to bring to press.
Not just newspapers, BBC Panorama is a shadow of its former self these days.
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast. 2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX. 3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen. 4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome. 5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government. 6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out, 7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
No it doesn't, a moderate centre right government would be PP led with Citizens support. Not a PP minority government reliant on confidence and supply from the hard right Vox to stay in power
Aren't Citizens very likely to get wiped out at this election? Although I haven't looked at the figures in detail yet. Just about to do so.
They are not even contesting it as their poll rating was so bad
Maybe the Conservatives should consider doing that at the next GE?
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast. 2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX. 3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen. 4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome. 5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government. 6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out, 7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
Here's what might be the crucial poll, though.
The Too Spanish Didn't Read is that if the two Corbynite parties can agree a joint ticket, they get a lot more seats than if they run against each other. (The Spanish system isn't entirely proportional, especially for small parties). PP still ahead, but probably unable to get a majority together. (And when push comes to shove, there would be a price to be paid if they do get into la cama with Vox.)
Why is it that lefties insist on falling out with each other, even when it's clearly not in their electoral interests?
Spain has small multimember STV, which means that below 15-20% you get very few seats, but above there you can get lots.
That's largely a US problem, I think, given their addiction to vehicular behemoths, and lax regulation of old buildings which make us look positively competent.
“It’s only the very old ones, built in the 60s and 70s, which are in a very poor state of repair and have weakened over time which will probably need to have some work done to them.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
And the SUV-ness is a big problem, electric or not.
The Telegraph really is a blooming awful parody of a newspaper these days. At some level, I blame their decision to stay broadsheet when everyone else went compact.
The Guardian is definitely moving downmarket too - lots of anecdotal articles about sex and marriage and everyday life, with hard domestic and foreign news other than the big stories literally down the end of the web page.
Partly that's because those articles are so much cheaper to write. Hence also why there are so many articles based on a handful of tweets.
Comments
"We've defeated the counteroffensive. In full. On day one. Every Ukrainian is dead."
Even during Kursk (which turned into a German disaster) it took from about the 4th to the 7th July before Germany started to recognise the offensive had failed and that the Soviets were using it to take the initiative and launch their own counterattack.
My feeling is that there are probably "locally" empty landscapes (especially in those mid-range villa landscapes that are abandoned to more subsistence family enclosures when the villa complex itself is becoming irreparable) and the migrants occupy that landscape (which is "known good" farmland); they then become culturally and genetically dominant in that space. Their success, and the interactions with the wider network are what develops our hybrid germanic/brythonic language.
Of course the carbon footprint is far less but the weight issue is undeniable. Lord only knows what 4 by 4 EVs will weigh.
“It’s not the little city electric cars that are likely to be a problem or the average family saloon, but some of the top-end electric vehicles like executive saloons or SUVs which are about three tonnes or over which could potentially be overloading some of these older multi-storey car parks.”
'“If you take pride in the past,” a Latin American researcher said with quiet exasperation before leaving, “then you have to take responsibility, too.”'
You do not have to take responsibility for anything at all that preceded your birth. This does not preclude you from feeling pleasure about the ability of your fellow community to achieve things.
Pollution on tyre degradation is apparently one often overlooked element,
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/heavy-electric-cars-toxic-tyre-particles-petrol-vehicles/
I have done up / rebuilt two houses and have never had builders leave their tools in any sort of storage locker.
I hope they catch the scrotes.
The Telegraph really is a blooming awful parody of a newspaper these days. At some level, I blame their decision to stay broadsheet when everyone else went compact.
It's probably easily dealt with in the UK, as the number of cars they'll need to exclude will be relatively small.
Ford's electric version of their best selling pickup, for example, is enormous.
"The Ford F-150 Ford Lightning has a curb weight of up to 6,500 lbs..." - a fraction under 3 tonnes.
(The Tesla Model Y is around 2t.)
(Source: Video shot by locals)
https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1665360733234659328
Looking further back it is a bit of a mixed back - mostly relatively short serving Foreign and Defence Ministers, and you have to go back to the 50s to get another ex-PM. Perhaps they are getting a bit more grand in their ambitions for the role, or PMs are leaving office younger and need other good gigs.
Rowan Atkinson's largely nonsense article in the Guardian might actually have a point regarding lighter solid state batteries, when it comes to the US...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-Henri_Spaak
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1665683699768107010
Same has often been true in real history, as per Aetius, or the triumvirs.
What has happened is the total rejection of anything Russian, even things- like Pushkin- that were previously respected. With Ukraine, Russia is an Empire, without it, it has "yet to find a role" and is derided as a bunch of loathsome barbarians who couldn´t even do pillaging right.
The new Hummer EV isn’t coming to the UK - because you’re not allowed to drive it on a car licence, it’s over 3,500kg.
With Russian losses in Bakhmut at anything up to 8:1 of those of the Ukrainians, this may be the greatest example of military rope-a-dope ever seen.
(I expect Mr Dancer to have at least a dozen examples of the tactic being a greater success!)
Meanwhile, the Ukranians are definitely on the offensive, but there’s a big blackout and people are being told not to share stuff online.
Capita hack: 90 organisations report data breaches to watchdog
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-65746518
My main point is I don't think weight is considered enough in road tax. Obviously we need HGVs and tractors for moving food and goods around but we don't need mahoosize cars and the EV versions are heavier than their ICE equivalents.
The CO2 element can be taxed by fuel duties as that'll vary depending on mileage. But fuel (Whether it's petrol, diesel or lithium ions) whilst it will perfectly match CO2 generation will be a very poor match for road wear generation. A road tax based on mileage (Between MOTs say) multiplied by kerb weight would be the best fit to match up with road wear.
Taxing EVs according to the 4th power of weight, might be a good way to go forward. Let a Leaf continue to pay no road tax, but let a BMW iX long range (2,700kg) pay a couple of grand a year in tax.
It doesn't seem very likely to me, given the continued cultural and linguistic diversity even within England, and what we know of extant genetic differences today. There were and still are many Englands within the borders of England. The wider you cast your net to catch of England, the more readily you will scoop up that which is not and never has been England. Do you think Cumbrians were closer to Sussex folk or to people from Strathclyde? How much did the people of Whitby have in common with Oksbøl versus Oxford?
I have serious doubts about whether you could ever draw a genetic line around England and only England at any point in all of England's history.
And if given the above is true, what use could there be for persisting with the myth if not to make political mischief today? In whose interest is it to link a nation to a fictional genetic stock, other than those whose ideology is filtration and exclusion?
More new polls since yesterday with the PP lead reaching 12% in the most recent. However,
1. Still no absolute majority forecast.
2. Only the PP could reach a majority with the support of VOX.
3. PSOE cannot reach absolute majority even if all the other parties apart from VOX back them and tat is not going to happen.
4. A PP simple majority with tacit VOX support is currently the most likely outcome.
5. Despite HYUFD's repeated claims point 4. above does not mean a hard right scenario for Spain, It means a moderate centre right government.
6. It is just about possible that a grand coalition of PP/PSOE could occur depending on how the final numbers pan out,
7. So far the decision of the PSOE to go for early elections does not seem to have been wise.
Of course as ever, we must wait 'la señora gorda canta!'
I think that this article may refer to the paper in Nature you are referring to.
The DNA suggests that there was significant migration from France into England during the Late Bronze Age.
This did not get as far as Scotland it appears.
Trinidad is a bit of Venezuela that fell off....
Also should speeding in bigger cars be treated more punitively?
I admit I am no car expert.
It's not rope a dope, but Lucullus defeating Tigranes at the Battle of Tigranocerta was monumentally bad for the Armenians.
I passed my test at 17 in 1995, so am one of the last to have the 7.5t endorsement, with grandfather rights for life. Not that I’ve ever actually used it, I managed to move house with a 3.5t truck.
That Holly apology in full #ThisMorning
https://twitter.com/Flynny123/status/1665670548716658693
You can't grade differently on limited roads though as the limit there is... the limit.
Around 1996 it probably looked ok as the new laws affected 17 year olds and who'd want them to drive huge powerful vehicles, but some of us with the nixxed licenses are in our early 40s now.
A former intelligence official turned whistleblower has given Congress and the Intelligence Community Inspector General extensive classified information about deeply covert programs that he says possess retrieved intact and partially intact craft of non-human origin.
The information, he says, has been illegally withheld from Congress, and he filed a complaint alleging that he suffered illegal retaliation for his confidential disclosures, reported here for the first time.
Other intelligence officials, both active and retired, with knowledge of these programs through their work in various agencies, have independently provided similar, corroborating information, both on and off the record.
The whistleblower, David Charles Grusch, 36, a decorated former combat officer in Afghanistan, is a veteran of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). He served as the reconnaissance office’s representative to the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force from 2019-2021. From late 2021 to July 2022, he was the NGA’s co-lead for UAP analysis and its representative to the task force.
These are what create an ethnic group. Claiming that the Anglo-Saxons did not exist as an ethnic group is like claiming that Poles, Germans, Ukrainians etc. did not.
Please just stop.
Thanks and blessings,
LG
Leon was not wrong, though, to point out what's now Ukraine was variously partitioned between the Russian, Polish Lithuanian, and Austria Hungarian empires over the course of several centuries.
And the idea of the modern nation state has its roots only in the nineteenth century.
The first real attempt at building a Ukrainian nation state in the modern sense - quickly crushed - was in the aftermath of WWI.
And then Stalin, and Holodomor, and Hitler.
And Stalin again.
Ukraine was a fairly cohesive nation after the Maidan revolution. All Putin has done is guarantee it will never go back.
So is the position that the Government has the ability to lock up anyone on more or less trumped-up charges, but it's unpredictable when they'll think it wise to do so? Thus Prigozhin gets away with it because Putin doesn't want the Wagner gruop mutinying?
If you want to tow a race car, a caravan, a horse box, a glider, or many other types of sporting equipment, it’s almost impossible with a post-1996 3.5t licence. A small trailer that you’d get in Halford’s is about all that’s allowed.
The trick is to find a relatively lightweight car with a high tow weight, such as a Golf TDi, and if you have a regular trailer full of equipment, re-weight it down to what it actually carries.
Don't tell TSE.
Based on the above only a PP/PSOE grand coalition could prevent Spain getting a hard right government
The hack is linked to BA’s payroll provider, Zellis, and other companies that work with the company have also had their information stolen...Zellis provides payroll support services to hundreds of companies in the UK...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/06/05/british-airways-and-boots-warn-staff-data-stolen-in-hack/
The Too Spanish Didn't Read is that if the two Corbynite parties can agree a joint ticket, they get a lot more seats than if they run against each other. (The Spanish system isn't entirely proportional, especially for small parties). PP still ahead, but probably unable to get a majority together. (And when push comes to shove, there would be a price to be paid if they do get into la cama with Vox.)
Why is it that lefties insist on falling out with each other, even when it's clearly not in their electoral interests?
P.S. I don't think anyone who passed their test in a Mini 1000 should be immediately qualified to drive a 7.5 tonne killing machine! Or a 3,5 tonne plus e-Humvee.
Not just newspapers, BBC Panorama is a shadow of its former self these days.