That’s an incredibly stupid interpretation of William Hague’s article.
Oh wait it is Matt Goodwin, as you were.
The thing about Matt Goodwin is that his predictions of populist revolt don't seem to come to pass. If there is another populist revolt on immigration, as was the case with Brexit, it is unlikely to change anything. The reality is that immigration will keep happening and it is better to look at how to manage it rather than stop it. The best argument against identity politics is that it doesn't help facilitate integration, it just creates division.
The thing about revolts is, they don't happen till they do. At that point, people then say, "why couldn't they see what was coming?"
Yeah ... but there comes a point, say after 50 years, that you can probably conclude that the moment has passed. I think this is true of immigration. If you look at the demographics of London, and the reduction of 'white British' between 2001 and 2021, something that has happened without any significant protest or revolt, then I think it is reasonable to conclude that it won't happen. Or if it happens it won't be effective at changing anything.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
Might be misunderstanding what you have written but the US was created before the French Revolution so before Napoleon’s reign.
Yes, that's a glaring error on my part.
But am I half remembering something - some way in which the French Revolution and Napoleonic era fed back into the development of the early US?
Would probably say that the US “revolution” was inspired by the Wars of the three Kingdoms and the writings of a lot of British thinkers and philosophers more than being French influence considering the French Crown tipped the balance in the Revolutionary war and it’s not unlikely that the US inspired the French Revolution rather than the other way round.
Today on More4. A man is building a hose. The land cost 71k. The planned construction cost is £160k. A total of £231k. He is paying £50k from his savings. His parents have remortgaged their house for the remaining £180k and have given it to him for warm fuzzies.
How much it will cost by the end? Will it even occur to him to pay his parents back? Will let you know at the end.
[8:18pm] Joe's original plan of risking building a basement without reinforced wall fucked up, to nobody's surprise. The overspend - that's over what was originally planned - is somewhere between £30-110k to cover the cost of throwing concrete at a damp hole.
I've probably mentioned this before, but my dad was in building and demolition, latterly specialisng in groundworks. He said you could never truly predict the cost of a project until it got out of the ground: there was always some embuggerance in foundations or services that ended up costing more than expected. Sometimes much more.
Agreed. If you want to make God laugh, show him your plans...
That’s an incredibly stupid interpretation of William Hague’s article.
Oh wait it is Matt Goodwin, as you were.
The thing about Matt Goodwin is that his predictions of populist revolt don't seem to come to pass. If there is another populist revolt on immigration, as was the case with Brexit, it is unlikely to change anything. The reality is that immigration will keep happening and it is better to look at how to manage it rather than stop it. The best argument against identity politics is that it doesn't help facilitate integration, it just creates division.
If immigration is essentially an economic phenomenon, then that could be reformulated as "more and more jobs will be created here", which seems like a much more tenuous prediction.
It's not just a economic phenomenon.
William Hague's nuanced piece talked about immigration happening because of other factors.
According to latest UN forecasts, the population of Africa and the Middle East is set to grow by around 320 million by the end of this decade, and 1.17 billion by 2050. We should hope that those vast numbers of young, digitally connected people will prosper in strong economies and stable political systems.
But it is only realistic to assume many will be driven by poverty, persecution and accelerating climate change to search for opportunity or safety elsewhere, particularly since they can research the countries that might provide that on their phones.
If only one in twenty of the people of that region migrated by mid-century — surely a conservative estimate — there would be 140 million people on the move.
The global population will grow by less over the next 25 years than it did over the preceding 25, and nobody can move anywhere unless it is economically viable for them to do so.
The estimates are about 1.2 billion fleeing climate change by 2050 a lot more than 140 million. I don't think european countries will accept anywhere near that number of immigrants which is why I expect fortress europe. We are already seeing the hardlines being drawn in europe not just the uk with current migrant flows with the eu selling migrants to libya for slave labour, greek navies doing dangerous towbacks and other reports that are of more dubious provenances that I cant confirm so wont mention
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
... though:
- the five million or so who died in his wars somehow never got to see the great leap forward in social progress - he was one of very few leaders in modern history to reintroduce slavery after it had been abolished - he caused chaos across Europe by grabbing thrones for his useless relatives - the protection for private property for some reason never prevented the systematic looting of much of Europe by the Grande Armee - the strategic and tactical genius only showed up when he was against second and third rate opponents, and deserted him in Russia, Spain and at Waterloo or whenever he had to think about ships - his career was indeed an inspiration to many, not least Franco, Lenin and Hitler
etc etc.
Without him, what would we have called Waterloo station and Trafalgar Square, huh?
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
... though:
- the five million or so who died in his wars somehow never got to see the great leap forward in social progress - he was one of very few leaders in modern history to reintroduce slavery after it had been abolished - he caused chaos across Europe by grabbing thrones for his useless relatives - the protection for private property for some reason never prevented the systematic looting of much of Europe by the Grande Armee - the strategic and tactical genius only showed up when he was against second and third rate opponents, and deserted him in Russia, Spain and at Waterloo or whenever he had to think about ships - his career was indeed an inspiration to many, not least Franco, Lenin and Hitler
etc etc.
As I recall he only entered Spain personally once, in 1808, and successfully re-occupied Madrid.
The fighting was otherwise left to his Marshals, Junot, Ney, Massena, Murat and Soult.
I'll criticise Napoleon any time you like but it's a bit unfair to say 'his tactical genius defeated him in Spain.'
[8:25] Hey, he's using SIPS (structural insulated panels) for the above-ground bits. Suddenly I'm interested! Oh, and he's given up work to devote time to this middle-class Wendy House. God knows who's paying for his and his wife's food and shelter, as that bit is not mentioned: either she works or Daddy wrote a bigger cheque, you tell me.
[8:32] She's paying to feed him so he can realise his dreams. He hopes to get it finished by the new year, or later. Her smile froze a little bit.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
... though:
- the five million or so who died in his wars somehow never got to see the great leap forward in social progress - he was one of very few leaders in modern history to reintroduce slavery after it had been abolished - he caused chaos across Europe by grabbing thrones for his useless relatives - the protection for private property for some reason never prevented the systematic looting of much of Europe by the Grande Armee - the strategic and tactical genius only showed up when he was against second and third rate opponents, and deserted him in Russia, Spain and at Waterloo or whenever he had to think about ships - his career was indeed an inspiration to many, not least Franco, Lenin and Hitler
etc etc.
Without him, what would we have called Waterloo station and Trafalgar Square, huh?
Agincourt Station and Crecy Square?
Mers-el-Kébir station and to show off our global alliances, von Blücher Square.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
... though:
- the five million or so who died in his wars somehow never got to see the great leap forward in social progress - he was one of very few leaders in modern history to reintroduce slavery after it had been abolished - he caused chaos across Europe by grabbing thrones for his useless relatives - the protection for private property for some reason never prevented the systematic looting of much of Europe by the Grande Armee - the strategic and tactical genius only showed up when he was against second and third rate opponents, and deserted him in Russia, Spain and at Waterloo or whenever he had to think about ships - his career was indeed an inspiration to many, not least Franco, Lenin and Hitler
etc etc.
Without him, what would we have called Waterloo station and Trafalgar Square, huh?
Victoria Station and Victoria Square.
Victoria Station (b) and Victoria Square (b) that would have to be.
For me, the biggest question in this mess is whether the talent used his position and influence to get things he would otherwise not get. In which case the BBC should get rid of him immediately, as it is an abuse of his position. If not - and what happened was legal - then not.
Aside from that, it appears so far to be nowhere near as clear-cut case as Schofield.
I saw some photos of a footballer of my acquaintance earlier today with a very scantily clad girl all over him. They were in Ibiza and seemed to be having fun. In Jessops world would this man be using his position and influence to get things he wouldn't otherwise get or is is it just a case of the birds and the bees and a nice celebration after winning the treble?
"Jessops world" ?
Without going into your footballer anecdote, if you think that abuse of position and influence is not an issue, then it explains many of your comments.
He has a point, though, which is why these things are not straightforward. Stars have pulling power. As Crouchy said when asked what he'd be if he weren't a footballer, "a virgin". Is it all down to abuse of power or fame? Often it is, which is why we need safeguards, but sometimes the debate is conducted as if women (or men) cannot enjoy sex without being lulled or coerced.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
Might be misunderstanding what you have written but the US was created before the French Revolution so before Napoleon’s reign.
Yes, that's a glaring error on my part.
But am I half remembering something - some way in which the French Revolution and Napoleonic era fed back into the development of the early US?
Would probably say that the US “revolution” was inspired by the Wars of the three Kingdoms and the writings of a lot of British thinkers and philosophers more than being French influence considering the French Crown tipped the balance in the Revolutionary war and it’s not unlikely that the US inspired the French Revolution rather than the other way round.
Also the Declaration of Arbroath.
A rather drunk young man with a mullet who was sat next to my daughter at Old Trafford in Friday butted into a conversation about American history to opine that every conflict in America since the British got there was the Americans reliving the English civil war.
He then went back to loudly abusing the Surrey bowlers.
The Guardian is trolling Boris re his new baby son.
Carrie Johnson, in the caption of an Instagram post with a picture of her holding the newborn, joked: “Welcome to the world Frank Alfred Odysseus Johnson born 5th July at 9.15am. (Can you guess which name my husband chose?!)”
That’s what one might expect from the Mirror, not a supposedly-serious newspaper.
No matter how much you dislike someone, wish them for positive life events.
Interesting NY Times story about the FT and the Guardian though. Something of a fight coming between US and UK media groups I wonder?
I tend to think "serious" left town when the iPhone arrived, and newspapers had to compete with cat pictures.
Nothing can compete with cat pictures.
I was shopping in town on Saturday and went into the library to clean up my emails and take some books back. Whilst I was sat at the terminal an elderly gentleman came in to do some research about something. After filling out some forms, he and the library assistant got to chatting. After some subjects of mutual incomprehension, they settled on talking about a website called "Cats that look like Hitler"
We are truly damned.
Ah yes. Kitlers.
Have just read that story out loud. My 12 year old daughter had just said "we have an Adolf Kittler" at school and produces photo of black and white cat with that tashe prominent under its nose...
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
That’s an incredibly stupid interpretation of William Hague’s article.
Oh wait it is Matt Goodwin, as you were.
The thing about Matt Goodwin is that his predictions of populist revolt don't seem to come to pass. If there is another populist revolt on immigration, as was the case with Brexit, it is unlikely to change anything. The reality is that immigration will keep happening and it is better to look at how to manage it rather than stop it. The best argument against identity politics is that it doesn't help facilitate integration, it just creates division.
If immigration is essentially an economic phenomenon, then that could be reformulated as "more and more jobs will be created here", which seems like a much more tenuous prediction.
It's not just a economic phenomenon.
William Hague's nuanced piece talked about immigration happening because of other factors.
According to latest UN forecasts, the population of Africa and the Middle East is set to grow by around 320 million by the end of this decade, and 1.17 billion by 2050. We should hope that those vast numbers of young, digitally connected people will prosper in strong economies and stable political systems.
But it is only realistic to assume many will be driven by poverty, persecution and accelerating climate change to search for opportunity or safety elsewhere, particularly since they can research the countries that might provide that on their phones.
If only one in twenty of the people of that region migrated by mid-century — surely a conservative estimate — there would be 140 million people on the move.
The global population will grow by less over the next 25 years than it did over the preceding 25, and nobody can move anywhere unless it is economically viable for them to do so.
The estimates are about 1.2 billion fleeing climate change by 2050 a lot more than 140 million. I don't think european countries will accept anywhere near that number of immigrants which is why I expect fortress europe. We are already seeing the hardlines being drawn in europe not just the uk with current migrant flows with the eu selling migrants to libya for slave labour, greek navies doing dangerous towbacks and other reports that are of more dubious provenances that I cant confirm so wont mention
In which case, you get to the stage of actually machine gunning them from helicopters.
This is why I resent getting old. I want to know what happens next, but in 2050 I will be either 90ish or not there at all.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
... though:
- the five million or so who died in his wars somehow never got to see the great leap forward in social progress - he was one of very few leaders in modern history to reintroduce slavery after it had been abolished - he caused chaos across Europe by grabbing thrones for his useless relatives - the protection for private property for some reason never prevented the systematic looting of much of Europe by the Grande Armee - the strategic and tactical genius only showed up when he was against second and third rate opponents, and deserted him in Russia, Spain and at Waterloo or whenever he had to think about ships - his career was indeed an inspiration to many, not least Franco, Lenin and Hitler
etc etc.
Without him, what would we have called Waterloo station and Trafalgar Square, huh?
Victoria Station and Victoria Square.
Victoria Station (b) and Victoria Square (b) that would have to be.
Maybe Minden Station - and of course Minden Bridge (British and Prussian, other Germans victory over French) and Sluys Square.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
... though:
- the five million or so who died in his wars somehow never got to see the great leap forward in social progress - he was one of very few leaders in modern history to reintroduce slavery after it had been abolished - he caused chaos across Europe by grabbing thrones for his useless relatives - the protection for private property for some reason never prevented the systematic looting of much of Europe by the Grande Armee - the strategic and tactical genius only showed up when he was against second and third rate opponents, and deserted him in Russia, Spain and at Waterloo or whenever he had to think about ships - his career was indeed an inspiration to many, not least Franco, Lenin and Hitler
etc etc.
Working backwards:
- those villains didn't really need any historical inspiration - Waterloo almost came off, probably lost by Ney's impulsiveness and Napoleon not being well. He would of course have lost the subsequent battle against Austria and Russia, but still. - his useless relatives were a handicap for sure - none of the armies of the time behaved particularly well - he represented an existential threat to the old order and Europe's monarchies were never going to allow his republic to survive and succeed. Britain spent the entire period stirring up the rest of Europe towards war on France -
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
Might be misunderstanding what you have written but the US was created before the French Revolution so before Napoleon’s reign.
Yes, that's a glaring error on my part.
But am I half remembering something - some way in which the French Revolution and Napoleonic era fed back into the development of the early US?
Would probably say that the US “revolution” was inspired by the Wars of the three Kingdoms and the writings of a lot of British thinkers and philosophers more than being French influence considering the French Crown tipped the balance in the Revolutionary war and it’s not unlikely that the US inspired the French Revolution rather than the other way round.
Also the Declaration of Arbroath.
A rather drunk young man with a mullet who was sat next to my daughter at Old Trafford in Friday butted into a conversation about American history to opine that every conflict in America since the British got there was the Americans reliving the English civil war.
He then went back to loudly abusing the Surrey bowlers.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
... though:
- the five million or so who died in his wars somehow never got to see the great leap forward in social progress - he was one of very few leaders in modern history to reintroduce slavery after it had been abolished - he caused chaos across Europe by grabbing thrones for his useless relatives - the protection for private property for some reason never prevented the systematic looting of much of Europe by the Grande Armee - the strategic and tactical genius only showed up when he was against second and third rate opponents, and deserted him in Russia, Spain and at Waterloo or whenever he had to think about ships - his career was indeed an inspiration to many, not least Franco, Lenin and Hitler
etc etc.
Without him, what would we have called Waterloo station and Trafalgar Square, huh?
Victoria Station and Victoria Square.
Victoria Station (b) and Victoria Square (b) that would have to be.
Ahem, the one near Buck House came later so would have lost out. Not so sure about the two Squares - they seem very nearly coeval.
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
[8:41] after altering the specs again, with variable width slats and quadruple thick glass because reasons, he is now about 6 months late, the money's runout, and he takes £25k from his wife to cover things for the moment. His wife, unaware of the existence of divorce lawyers or the indetectability of thallium poisoning, lets him take it. She just wants him to be happy. Which is nice.
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
[8:41] after altering the specs again, with variable width slats and quadruple thick glass because reasons, he is now about 6 months late, the money's runout, and he takes £25k from his wife to cover things for the moment. His wife, unaware of the existence of divorce lawyers or the indetectability of thallium poisoning, lets him take it. She just wants him to be happy. Which is nice.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
... though:
- the five million or so who died in his wars somehow never got to see the great leap forward in social progress - he was one of very few leaders in modern history to reintroduce slavery after it had been abolished - he caused chaos across Europe by grabbing thrones for his useless relatives - the protection for private property for some reason never prevented the systematic looting of much of Europe by the Grande Armee - the strategic and tactical genius only showed up when he was against second and third rate opponents, and deserted him in Russia, Spain and at Waterloo or whenever he had to think about ships - his career was indeed an inspiration to many, not least Franco, Lenin and Hitler
etc etc.
Without him, what would we have called Waterloo station and Trafalgar Square, huh?
Victoria Station and Victoria Square.
Victoria Station (b) and Victoria Square (b) that would have to be.
Pedant alert: As Waterloo station was built in 1848, it would have been Victoria Station (a). The one in Westminster (built 1862) would have been Victoria Station (b) or more likely Albert Station.
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
[8:41] after altering the specs again, with variable width slats and quadruple thick glass because reasons, he is now about 6 months late, the money's runout, and he takes £25k from his wife to cover things for the moment. His wife, unaware of the existence of divorce lawyers or the indetectability of thallium poisoning, lets him take it. She just wants him to be happy. Which is nice.
Where is this happening?
In the abyss of the British homeowner consciousness, the Chtulhu Mythos as applied to Moving Places.
Apropos of absolutely nothing but given how charming everyone (once) found The Great British Bake-Off, why is the professionals version such an absolute charm-free zone?
I accept it's not the burning issue of the day, but, still.
Post Office scandal, Tory MPs censured by Commons, lots of other bad news getting squeezed out.
The latest developments in the Post Office Inquiry - yet more postponements because the Post Office still hasn't disclosed all the documents it has been ordered to - and the Nottingham maternity hospital scandal are far more important stories than the sex life of some BBC presenter.
But will be ignored. Sigh!
I fear the judge in the Post Office Inquiry is too weak and the Post Office are playing him as they did to all the other courts which have tried to hold them to account. Badenoch is doing fuck all and every day she does fuck all about this she demonstrates that she does not have what it takes to be a leader.
I am so angry about this because this is a scandal caused in great part by the legal profession and by internal investigators behaving very unprofessionally and disgracefully indeed. So it pains me to see my profession behaving so badly - not just in the events which caused this scandal - but now in the inquiry set up to find out the truth and hold them to account.
People have died. It is atrocious.
As for Nottingham, how we can be so careless about life at its most precious moment - when it starts, when there is hope for a new life, an offering to the future - beats me. We seem to value the valueless and disregard what ought to be most precious.
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
[8:41] after altering the specs again, with variable width slats and quadruple thick glass because reasons, he is now about 6 months late, the money's runout, and he takes £25k from his wife to cover things for the moment. His wife, unaware of the existence of divorce lawyers or the indetectability of thallium poisoning, lets him take it. She just wants him to be happy. Which is nice.
Where is this happening?
In the abyss of the British homeowner consciousness, the Chtulhu Mythos as applied to Moving Places.
Apropos of absolutely nothing but given how charming everyone (once) found The Great British Bake-Off, why is the professionals version such an absolute charm-free zone?
I accept it's not the burning issue of the day, but, still.
It is if you leave them buns in the oven too long.
I know someone who is obsessed with self build. He did his own self build project (although it was more like a custom build project which he helped to project manage) and then gave up a career in the civil service to lead a self build trade organisation/lobby group. 15 years ago someone asked him 'should we really be encouraging self build when so many projects fail?', to which he responded that 'people who fail have only themselves to blame'.
[8:55] two years after the start, a year over schedule, after he shamelessly took money from his friends, relatives, neighbours and even the council, the house is now completed. It is very nice, well finished and lacks only the little altar at which to pray for forgiveness for his parasitism. She looks at him, unsmiling, and does not reach to him.
I know someone who is obsessed with self build. He did his own self build project (although it was more like a custom build project which he helped to project manage) and then gave up a career in the civil service to lead a self build trade organisation/lobby group. 15 years ago someone asked him 'should we really be encouraging self build when so many projects fail?', to which he responded that 'people who fail have only themselves to blame'.
[8:57] the final overspend (not including opportunity cost of his lost wages, his reduced wages here forward, and his neighbour's electricity) was £90k and a year. His parents will never see the money back, his wife will only get is back when he dies and the insurance pays out, but the house is very catalogue. So there's that.
Today on More4. A man is building a hose. The land cost 71k. The planned construction cost is £160k. A total of £231k. He is paying £50k from his savings. His parents have remortgaged their house for the remaining £180k and have given it to him for warm fuzzies.
How much it will cost by the end? Will it even occur to him to pay his parents back? Will let you know at the end.
[8:18pm] Joe's original plan of risking building a basement without reinforced wall fucked up, to nobody's surprise. The overspend - that's over what was originally planned - is somewhere between £30-110k to cover the cost of throwing concrete at a damp hole.
I've probably mentioned this before, but my dad was in building and demolition, latterly specialisng in groundworks. He said you could never truly predict the cost of a project until it got out of the ground: there was always some embuggerance in foundations or services that ended up costing more than expected. Sometimes much more.
When we did our kitchen extension this was one of our builder's most frequent comments. Probably second only to "can you give me another thousand pounds".
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
[8:41] after altering the specs again, with variable width slats and quadruple thick glass because reasons, he is now about 6 months late, the money's runout, and he takes £25k from his wife to cover things for the moment. His wife, unaware of the existence of divorce lawyers or the indetectability of thallium poisoning, lets him take it. She just wants him to be happy. Which is nice.
How on earth can the BBC presenter's name be kept out of the public domain for much longer? Surely it will be out tonight, or if not tonight by tomorrow night?
The Independent haven't changed their URL with the word "arrested" in it:
The Met are looking almost as big a bunch of w***ers as the BBC. Who do the BBC think they are anyway, graciously putting their own investigation on hold until the police conduct theirs, as if they have a right to tell the police to butt out? Are they trying to take a leaf from the book the Catholic church used to follow until recently? I hope the police tell them to f*** off and publicly. (Unlikely though.)
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
[8:57] the final overspend (not including opportunity cost of his lost wages, his reduced wages here forward, and his neighbour's electricity) was £90k and a year. His parents will never see the money back, his wife will only get is back when he dies and the insurance pays out, but the house is very catalogue. So there's that.
The trouble with a catalogue house is it needs a lot of effort to keep it that way.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
Might be misunderstanding what you have written but the US was created before the French Revolution so before Napoleon’s reign.
Yes, that's a glaring error on my part.
But am I half remembering something - some way in which the French Revolution and Napoleonic era fed back into the development of the early US?
Post Office scandal, Tory MPs censured by Commons, lots of other bad news getting squeezed out.
The latest developments in the Post Office Inquiry - yet more postponements because the Post Office still hasn't disclosed all the documents it has been ordered to - and the Nottingham maternity hospital scandal are far more important stories than the sex life of some BBC presenter.
But will be ignored. Sigh!
I fear the judge in the Post Office Inquiry is too weak and the Post Office are playing him as they did to all the other courts which have tried to hold them to account. Badenoch is doing fuck all and every day she does fuck all about this she demonstrates that she does not have what it takes to be a leader.
I am so angry about this because this is a scandal caused in great part by the legal profession and by internal investigators behaving very unprofessionally and disgracefully indeed. So it pains me to see my profession behaving so badly - not just in the events which caused this scandal - but now in the inquiry set up to find out the truth and hold them to account.
People have died. It is atrocious.
As for Nottingham, how we can be so careless about life at its most precious moment - when it starts, when there is hope for a new life, an offering to the future - beats me. We seem to value the valueless and disregard what ought to be most precious.
Hypothesis, partly nicked from reading about the crud economy:
The legal profession has got to be like stag's antlers, or peacock's tails.
There's an advantage to being the peacock with the best tail, or the stag with the best antlers. But as a species, it's blooming stupid- huge amounts of energy going into something pointless. Humans, who wasted our spare energy on brains, at least managed to do other stuff with them.
In law, there's an advantage in having the best lawyer, who can make the most favourable argument from the available facts. Our system depends on everyone doing that as best they can, whatever you think of the underlying case. But the risk of that is that huge resources and thought get invested in defending the indefensible. And it is worth organisations creating a culture where that is seen as desirable. There are massive downsides to that, but they're borne by society as a whole. It's in no firm or organisation's interest to be the first to say "sorry, we messed up royally."
How on earth can the BBC presenter's name be kept out of the public domain for much longer? Surely it will be out tonight, or if not tonight by tomorrow night?
The Independent haven't changed their URL with the word "arrested" in it:
The Met are looking almost as big a bunch of w***ers as the BBC. Who do the BBC think they are anyway, graciously putting their own investigation on hold until the police conduct theirs, as if they have a right to tell the police to butt out? Are they trying to take a leaf from the book the Catholic church used to follow until recently? I hope the police tell them to f*** off and publicly.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
Needless to say, this is an absurd interpretation of the Refugee Convention. The issue is whether citizens of a State have a well-founded fear of persecution there on the grounds listed in the Convention, not whether that State is nice to foreign tourists.
Anna Firth MP reckons there is no reason for any Indian or Turkish people to claim asylum, because "British people go there on holiday".
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
I hope the S*n and GBeebies get sued out of existence.
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
[8:41] after altering the specs again, with variable width slats and quadruple thick glass because reasons, he is now about 6 months late, the money's runout, and he takes £25k from his wife to cover things for the moment. His wife, unaware of the existence of divorce lawyers or the indetectability of thallium poisoning, lets him take it. She just wants him to be happy. Which is nice.
Where is this happening?
London. East End. No more detail than that.
Sept 2015 to Sept 2017
I couldn't bear to watch that, so many thanks for the report. Especially as I've been watching a one-man builder fuck up the retirement plans of a local couple in terms of the upgrading and extension of a bungalow on the corner. More than two years on and it's still not done. Things like building one leaf of a cavity wall, putting the insulation in, and then leaving it exposed to the local weather all through one winter and a fair chunk of autumn, spring and summer too. The poor couple could not wait any longer to move in and are now in a house with stickers on the windows and crap everywhere and the outside walls still not rendered.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Good points. We should name a London station in honour of him!
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
Might be misunderstanding what you have written but the US was created before the French Revolution so before Napoleon’s reign.
Yes, that's a glaring error on my part.
But am I half remembering something - some way in which the French Revolution and Napoleonic era fed back into the development of the early US?
I think your muddle is that the huge financial cost bankrolling the American War of Independence and fighting in it caused France to go bankrupt, at which point the ideas espoused in it came to the fore and caused a full revolution.
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
[8:41] after altering the specs again, with variable width slats and quadruple thick glass because reasons, he is now about 6 months late, the money's runout, and he takes £25k from his wife to cover things for the moment. His wife, unaware of the existence of divorce lawyers or the indetectability of thallium poisoning, lets him take it. She just wants him to be happy. Which is nice.
Where is this happening?
In the abyss of the British homeowner consciousness, the Chtulhu Mythos as applied to Moving Places.
Well it's not quite Dread Ry'leh but it's an up-and-coming gentrifying area of the West End, so depends which is worse: eldritch abominations from the lands with too many edges on a cube, or hipsters. Toss a coin, really
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
He was my 6 x grandfather. As a result I got invited to the 200th anniversary remembrance service of Waterloo in 2015 with a very good seat with all the other hobnobs. The real highlight for me was hearing the choir sing part of Hadyn's Creation, which is a stunning piece and, in that setting, sublime. Then there was a wonderful reception afterwards with lots of soldiers and it was all very Austen-like.
I got to meet the Duke of Wellington and my brother - who had imbibed freely of the free drinks - whispered loudly as he came round that I should ask him for an apology. But you know me - ever the diplomat.
Naples of course was inspired by Napoleon to rebel against the Bourbons and the rebels set up the Parthenopean Republic. Via Partenope is now one of the main roads near the sea front. (It is said that she founded Naples when fleeing Odysseus.) It was put down by the Bourbons with the help of the English, including Nelson who said he would deal with the rebels as viciously as the Irish rebels had been (in the Wolfe Tone-led rebellion of 1798). The English like to see themselves on the side of freedom but the historical record says otherwise.
Susan Sontag's novel "The Volcano Lover" based on the life of Sir William Hamilton and set at the time of these events is well worth reading.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Good points. We should name a London station in honour of him!
How on earth can the BBC presenter's name be kept out of the public domain for much longer? Surely it will be out tonight, or if not tonight by tomorrow night?
The Independent haven't changed their URL with the word "arrested" in it:
The Met are looking almost as big a bunch of w***ers as the BBC. Who do the BBC think they are anyway, graciously putting their own investigation on hold until the police conduct theirs, as if they have a right to tell the police to butt out? Are they trying to take a leaf from the book the Catholic church used to follow until recently? I hope the police tell them to f*** off and publicly.
It's already bleedin' obvious.
The name is now basically named. You don't even have to read between the lines, you can just read one line above the other, or below
Whether this person is guilty or not, it has all become quite tawdry and sad - already
Post Office scandal, Tory MPs censured by Commons, lots of other bad news getting squeezed out.
The latest developments in the Post Office Inquiry - yet more postponements because the Post Office still hasn't disclosed all the documents it has been ordered to - and the Nottingham maternity hospital scandal are far more important stories than the sex life of some BBC presenter.
But will be ignored. Sigh!
I fear the judge in the Post Office Inquiry is too weak and the Post Office are playing him as they did to all the other courts which have tried to hold them to account. Badenoch is doing fuck all and every day she does fuck all about this she demonstrates that she does not have what it takes to be a leader.
I am so angry about this because this is a scandal caused in great part by the legal profession and by internal investigators behaving very unprofessionally and disgracefully indeed. So it pains me to see my profession behaving so badly - not just in the events which caused this scandal - but now in the inquiry set up to find out the truth and hold them to account.
People have died. It is atrocious.
How on earth is this not contempt of court? Surely a strong judge would be banging people up at this point.
Do let me know when it's not another doom and gloom for the Tories thread. Noone has picked up on Starmers inability to talk to.people who ask searching questions.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Good points. We should name a London station in honour of him!
It would be dozy to call a place after Nap.
Maybe some bus stop in Chislehurst? Prince Imperial Road there - which is close enough.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
Dear me. I have a horrible feeling this is going to sound rather silly by this time tomorrow.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
He was my 6 x grandfather. As a result I got invited to the 200th anniversary remembrance service of Waterloo in 2015 with a very good seat with all the other hobnobs. The real highlight for me was hearing the choir sing part of Hadyn's Creation, which is a stunning piece and, in that setting, sublime. Then there was a wonderful reception afterwards with lots of soldiers and it was all very Austen-like.
I got to meet the Duke of Wellington and my brother - who had imbibed freely of the free drinks - whispered loudly as he came round that I should ask him for an apology. But you know me - ever the diplomat.
Naples of course was inspired by Napoleon to rebel against the Bourbons and the rebels set up the Parthenopean Republic. Via Partenope is now one of the main roads near the sea front. (It is said that she founded Naples when fleeing Odysseus.) It was put down by the Bourbons with the help of the English, including Nelson who said he would deal with the rebels as viciously as the Irish rebels had been (in the Wolfe Tone-led rebellion of 1798). The English like to see themselves on the side of freedom but the historical record says otherwise.
Susan Sontag's novel "The Volcano Lover" based on the life of Sir William Hamilton and set at the time of these events is well worth reading.
The problem was, the lower classes overwhelmingly supported the Bourbons, only the professional classes were pro-Republican.
Nelson's behaviour was nonetheless appalling, in fact, worse than you describe. His deputy had accepted a surrender of the rebels, upon condition they be transported to France, which Nelson repudiated. That was in accordance with the law of war. But, having repudiated the terms of surrender, he ought then to have restored the prisoners to the forts which they had held, with suffiicient powder and shot to make a defence. Instead, he handed them over to Ferdinand and Maria Carlonia for execution.
Today on More4. A man is building a hose. The land cost 71k. The planned construction cost is £160k. A total of £231k. He is paying £50k from his savings. His parents have remortgaged their house for the remaining £180k and have given it to him for warm fuzzies.
How much it will cost by the end? Will it even occur to him to pay his parents back? Will let you know at the end.
[8:18pm] Joe's original plan of risking building a basement without reinforced wall fucked up, to nobody's surprise. The overspend - that's over what was originally planned - is somewhere between £30-110k to cover the cost of throwing concrete at a damp hole.
I've probably mentioned this before, but my dad was in building and demolition, latterly specialisng in groundworks. He said you could never truly predict the cost of a project until it got out of the ground: there was always some embuggerance in foundations or services that ended up costing more than expected. Sometimes much more.
When we did our kitchen extension this was one of our builder's most frequent comments. Probably second only to "can you give me another thousand pounds".
Having recently built a house I can vouch for the fact that it always costs more than you think. And takes far longer than planned (though Covid didn't help!)
But, despite everything, project managing it has been one of the best experiences of my life - I loved seeing how buildings are made and thinking about how the design and structure and materials have to work together to create something that is both beautiful but also in harmony with its surroundings - and efficient. We should make self-building easier.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
[8:40] he's changed the plans to massively ovetinsulate, fuck knows why. The schedule has slipped past new year. He's only got £30k left, so he's scabbing off his neighbour for free electricity to run the tools. She still buys him pizza: having committed to him to father her children, she now explores sunk-cost fallacy to the uttermost
[8:41] after altering the specs again, with variable width slats and quadruple thick glass because reasons, he is now about 6 months late, the money's runout, and he takes £25k from his wife to cover things for the moment. His wife, unaware of the existence of divorce lawyers or the indetectability of thallium poisoning, lets him take it. She just wants him to be happy. Which is nice.
Where is this happening?
London. East End. No more detail than that.
Sept 2015 to Sept 2017
I couldn't bear to watch that, so many thanks for the report. Especially as I've been watching a one-man builder fuck up the retirement plans of a local couple in terms of the upgrading and extension of a bungalow on the corner. More than two years on and it's still not done. Things like building one leaf of a cavity wall, putting the insulation in, and then leaving it exposed to the local weather all through one winter and a fair chunk of autumn, spring and summer too. The poor couple could not wait any longer to move in and are now in a house with stickers on the windows and crap everywhere and the outside walls still not rendered.
You're welcome. Yes I've seen things go wrong and it's frightening. A couple once got a builder in to do a loft conversion. Chuckles sawed thru the diagonal supports and didn't adequately reinforce. The downward force of the roof now no longer vertical, the walls began to sag outwards, pushed out by the roof. They didn't catch it in time. The auction brief was sad, they had their hearts torn out: both doctors, even they could not cover the cost to fix. Really sad...
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
No, I don't think so.
Not everyone will agree! But I doubt that The S*n and GBeebies give a rat fuck about the "child" who is the alleged victim. They just want to bash the left, somehow hoping that they manage to turn enough people against the "woke agenda" to make the election winnable.
Big piece in the FT today (that bastion of leftie socialism) with leading Tories admitting defeat and hoping to disappear off for the summer with *something* happening to save them...
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Trying to spot the wood of historical good sense through the trees of anti-French and pro-British hyperbole.
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
How on earth can the BBC presenter's name be kept out of the public domain for much longer? Surely it will be out tonight, or if not tonight by tomorrow night?
The Independent haven't changed their URL with the word "arrested" in it:
The Met are looking almost as big a bunch of w***ers as the BBC. Who do the BBC think they are anyway, graciously putting their own investigation on hold until the police conduct theirs, as if they have a right to tell the police to butt out? Are they trying to take a leaf from the book the Catholic church used to follow until recently? I hope the police tell them to f*** off and publicly.
It's already bleedin' obvious.
The name is now basically named. You don't even have to read between the lines, you can just read one line above the other, or below
Whether this person is guilty or not, it has all become quite tawdry and sad - already
Define guilty. There's that massive expanse of grey where no formal rules have been broken but something has been lost and can't be regained. And it's likely that this story is somewhere there.
(That may change, and has a bit with this afternoon's revelations. But foolishly reacting to a threat to expose you... ugh on both sides.)
And ultimately... Has this story added to the sum of human happiness? It isn't likely to cause a family reconciliation. It's not obvious that any particular justice has been served. But the media have had fun for a few days.
Post Office scandal, Tory MPs censured by Commons, lots of other bad news getting squeezed out.
The latest developments in the Post Office Inquiry - yet more postponements because the Post Office still hasn't disclosed all the documents it has been ordered to - and the Nottingham maternity hospital scandal are far more important stories than the sex life of some BBC presenter.
But will be ignored. Sigh!
I fear the judge in the Post Office Inquiry is too weak and the Post Office are playing him as they did to all the other courts which have tried to hold them to account. Badenoch is doing fuck all and every day she does fuck all about this she demonstrates that she does not have what it takes to be a leader.
I am so angry about this because this is a scandal caused in great part by the legal profession and by internal investigators behaving very unprofessionally and disgracefully indeed. So it pains me to see my profession behaving so badly - not just in the events which caused this scandal - but now in the inquiry set up to find out the truth and hold them to account.
People have died. It is atrocious.
How on earth is this not contempt of court? Surely a strong judge would be banging people up at this point.
That's why I said that I fear the judge is weak. Or he thinks the government will not back him if he takes stronger action than simply yet more "I am very disappointed"statements.
The Post Office have behaved like this throughout. As an organisation they seem to have utter contempt for judges and the courts. The Board is appointed by the government. I can't help feeling that they're behaving like this because they know the government won't really take - or allow - any action to be taken against them.
Do let me know when it's not another doom and gloom for the Tories thread. Noone has picked up on Starmers inability to talk to.people who ask searching questions.
Feel free to write a 'Tories on the cusp of a great comeback' thread header.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
No, I don't think so.
Not everyone will agree! But I doubt that The S*n and GBeebies give a rat fuck about the "child" who is the alleged victim. They just want to bash the left, somehow hoping that they manage to turn enough people against the "woke agenda" to make the election winnable.
Big piece in the FT today (that bastion of leftie socialism) with leading Tories admitting defeat and hoping to disappear off for the summer with *something* happening to save them...
GBeebies means GB news does it? Not a terribly clever nickname in the context. The bloke in question is by no means on the left side of the BBC. Your rant is so out of kilter with this afternoon's developments that I suspect you are unaware of them.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
Might be misunderstanding what you have written but the US was created before the French Revolution so before Napoleon’s reign.
That's what I came here to say. Baffling thing to say. The fact is that one of the proximate causes of the French revolution was the shitty state of the French treasury. No small part of that was expenditure to help the Americans shake free from Great Britain.
Napoleon was a great general and a case study in why you shouldn't let generals -- great or small -- rule a country.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Trying to spot the wood of historical good sense through the trees of anti-French and pro-British hyperbole.
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
More astute observers than you accept what I say. Often they are French
Losing the 7 Years War was a disaster for ultimate French supremacy: leaving Britain supreme in America, India and elsewhere
But Napoleon had an enormous chance to turn it around. He was worshipped across Europe in liberal and even aristo circles (insanely, to my mind, but there it is). If he had cemented French control of Europe (eg. don't invade Russia?) he would have left French as the hegemonic global culture and English as an outlier, as Europe expanded worldwide
And if he hadn't sold half of the USA and instead developed it, half of North America might now be speaking French
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
No, I don't think so.
Not everyone will agree! But I doubt that The S*n and GBeebies give a rat fuck about the "child" who is the alleged victim. They just want to bash the left, somehow hoping that they manage to turn enough people against the "woke agenda" to make the election winnable.
Big piece in the FT today (that bastion of leftie socialism) with leading Tories admitting defeat and hoping to disappear off for the summer with *something* happening to save them...
This has nothing to do with the Tories. Why are the Mirror so keen on it if it is?
If it is a witch hunt then that's because the BBC has knowingly harboured witches in the past.
Beyond that, it is clearly salacious gossip with no regard to any of the parties involved.
Today on More4. A man is building a hose. The land cost 71k. The planned construction cost is £160k. A total of £231k. He is paying £50k from his savings. His parents have remortgaged their house for the remaining £180k and have given it to him for warm fuzzies.
How much it will cost by the end? Will it even occur to him to pay his parents back? Will let you know at the end.
[8:18pm] Joe's original plan of risking building a basement without reinforced wall fucked up, to nobody's surprise. The overspend - that's over what was originally planned - is somewhere between £30-110k to cover the cost of throwing concrete at a damp hole.
I've probably mentioned this before, but my dad was in building and demolition, latterly specialisng in groundworks. He said you could never truly predict the cost of a project until it got out of the ground: there was always some embuggerance in foundations or services that ended up costing more than expected. Sometimes much more.
When we did our kitchen extension this was one of our builder's most frequent comments. Probably second only to "can you give me another thousand pounds".
Having recently built a house I can vouch for the fact that it always costs more than you think. And takes far longer than planned (though Covid didn't help!)
But, despite everything, project managing it has been one of the best experiences of my life - I loved seeing how buildings are made and thinking about how the design and structure and materials have to work together to create something that is both beautiful but also in harmony with its surroundings - and efficient. We should make self-building easier.
Snap. We did our house 13 years ago and at the end said 'never again'.
But now we're seriously considering doing another similar project, applying all the lessons of 'what not to do' from last time.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
He was my 6 x grandfather. As a result I got invited to the 200th anniversary remembrance service of Waterloo in 2015 with a very good seat with all the other hobnobs. The real highlight for me was hearing the choir sing part of Hadyn's Creation, which is a stunning piece and, in that setting, sublime. Then there was a wonderful reception afterwards with lots of soldiers and it was all very Austen-like.
I got to meet the Duke of Wellington and my brother - who had imbibed freely of the free drinks - whispered loudly as he came round that I should ask him for an apology. But you know me - ever the diplomat.
Naples of course was inspired by Napoleon to rebel against the Bourbons and the rebels set up the Parthenopean Republic. Via Partenope is now one of the main roads near the sea front. (It is said that she founded Naples when fleeing Odysseus.) It was put down by the Bourbons with the help of the English, including Nelson who said he would deal with the rebels as viciously as the Irish rebels had been (in the Wolfe Tone-led rebellion of 1798). The English like to see themselves on the side of freedom but the historical record says otherwise.
Susan Sontag's novel "The Volcano Lover" based on the life of Sir William Hamilton and set at the time of these events is well worth reading.
The problem was, the lower classes overwhelmingly supported the Bourbons, only the professional classes were pro-Republican.
Nelson's behaviour was nonetheless appalling, in fact, worse than you describe. His deputy had accepted a surrender of the rebels, upon condition they be transported to France, which Nelson repudiated. That was in accordance with the law of war. But, having repudiated the terms of surrender, he ought then to have restored the prisoners to the forts which they had held, with suffiicient powder and shot to make a defence. Instead, he handed them over to Ferdinand and Maria Carlonia for execution.
My Neapolitan ancestors (who came over with the Spanish in the 17th century) would certainly have been on the side of the Bourbons rather than the rebels.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
"His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history." [Ken Livingstone voice] You know who else had those abilities? Bonkers stuff.
Regarding Biden, if he is going to decide against running in 2024, when is the right time for him to announce it? Too early and he becomes a lame duck POTUS for longer than necessary; too late and it hampers the Democrats campaign.
I'd guess a month or so before the first primary, so early January maybe?
How on earth can the BBC presenter's name be kept out of the public domain for much longer? Surely it will be out tonight, or if not tonight by tomorrow night?
The Independent haven't changed their URL with the word "arrested" in it:
The Met are looking almost as big a bunch of w***ers as the BBC. Who do the BBC think they are anyway, graciously putting their own investigation on hold until the police conduct theirs, as if they have a right to tell the police to butt out? Are they trying to take a leaf from the book the Catholic church used to follow until recently? I hope the police tell them to f*** off and publicly.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Trying to spot the wood of historical good sense through the trees of anti-French and pro-British hyperbole.
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
More astute observers than you accept what I say. Often they are French
Losing the 7 Years War was a disaster for ultimate French supremacy: leaving Britain supreme in America, India and elsewhere
But Napoleon had an enormous chance to turn it around. He was worshipped across Europe in liberal and even aristo circles (insanely, to my mind, but there it is). If he had cemented French control of Europe (eg. don't invade Russia?) he would have left French as the hegemonic global culture and English as an outlier, as Europe expanded worldwide
And if he hadn't sold half of the USA and instead developed it, half of North America might now be speaking French
And all that flows from that....
He fucked it up, in true Napoleonic style
I think you're right.
Napoleon did for the French what Brexit is doing to the British.
JUST IN: DOJ declines to stand in for Trump in second Carroll lawsuit, saying he was NOT acting within the scope of his presidential authority when he disparaged her in 2019.
Trump's attacks on Carroll after the jury found him liable for assaulting her were part of DOJ's decision to decline to defend him in Carroll's 2nd trial. They undermined any pretence that his earlier attacks were about "a desire to serve the government." https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1678862228181639174
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Trying to spot the wood of historical good sense through the trees of anti-French and pro-British hyperbole.
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
Hold on, am I understanding you right... do you think the Reign of Terror was the work of Napoleon? Also, I assume you're referring to Louis XVI.
I think you need to understand the gap of several years between the outbreak of revolution and the rise of Napoleon. It sounds to me like you think he was integral to it as opposed to a beneficiary.
Regarding Biden, if he is going to decide against running in 2024, when is the right time for him to announce it? Too early and he becomes a lame duck POTUS for longer than necessary; too late and it hampers the Democrats campaign.
I'd guess a month or so before the first primary, so early January maybe?
Whenever he doesn't think it hands the election to Trump would be ideal, but given Trump doesn't seem likely to go on trial for anything before the primaries, that would seem to limit Biden somewhat.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
What other military or political leader came up with anything as cool as this?
Take any triangle. Construct equilateral triangles on its sides, either all pointing outwards or all pointing inwards. Connect their centres, aaaaand ... you've got yourself another equilateral triangle.
Napoleon also sussed that by far the most important rhetorical device was repetition.
Agreed he was nowhere near as cool as Robespierre.
Regarding Biden, if he is going to decide against running in 2024, when is the right time for him to announce it? Too early and he becomes a lame duck POTUS for longer than necessary; too late and it hampers the Democrats campaign.
I'd guess a month or so before the first primary, so early January maybe?
Honestly, he should do so by about now to be frank.
A month or so before the primary is too late to allow a proper primary campaign to get the best candidate through to win for the Democrats.
Trying to avoid being a lame duck for a few extra months isn't worth increasing the risk of letting the GOP have the Oval Office for four years.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
"His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history." [Ken Livingstone voice] You know who else had those abilities? Bonkers stuff.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
Muckrakers gonna rake muck. The Sun doesn't have a reputation to lose; the BBC does. This war is assymmetric.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
No, I don't think so.
Not everyone will agree! But I doubt that The S*n and GBeebies give a rat fuck about the "child" who is the alleged victim. They just want to bash the left, somehow hoping that they manage to turn enough people against the "woke agenda" to make the election winnable.
Big piece in the FT today (that bastion of leftie socialism) with leading Tories admitting defeat and hoping to disappear off for the summer with *something* happening to save them...
GBeebies means GB news does it? Not a terribly clever nickname in the context. The bloke in question is by no means on the left side of the BBC. Your rant is so out of kilter with this afternoon's developments that I suspect you are unaware of them.
It’s the American style culture war thing. You pick a side. Everyone from my side is innocent. Of everything.
The winning move is to wait for the actual facts and base judgements of guilt and innocence on those.
JUST IN: DOJ declines to stand in for Trump in second Carroll lawsuit, saying he was NOT acting within the scope of his presidential authority when he disparaged her in 2019.
Trump's attacks on Carroll after the jury found him liable for assaulting her were part of DOJ's decision to decline to defend him in Carroll's 2nd trial. They undermined any pretence that his earlier attacks were about "a desire to serve the government." https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1678862228181639174
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Trying to spot the wood of historical good sense through the trees of anti-French and pro-British hyperbole.
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
More astute observers than you accept what I say. Often they are French
Losing the 7 Years War was a disaster for ultimate French supremacy: leaving Britain supreme in America, India and elsewhere
But Napoleon had an enormous chance to turn it around. He was worshipped across Europe in liberal and even aristo circles (insanely, to my mind, but there it is). If he had cemented French control of Europe (eg. don't invade Russia?) he would have left French as the hegemonic global culture and English as an outlier, as Europe expanded worldwide
And if he hadn't sold half of the USA and instead developed it, half of North America might now be speaking French
And all that flows from that....
He fucked it up, in true Napoleonic style
His highs were very high. He was extraordinarily able. He's had a lasting legacy.
But we cannot really ignore the outcome for him, and France, in the aftermath.
I leave it to historians to argue what was inevitable or not (as much as anything is), but to a casual observer it seems a classic case of biting off too much to consolidate.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Trying to spot the wood of historical good sense through the trees of anti-French and pro-British hyperbole.
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
More astute observers than you accept what I say. Often they are French
Losing the 7 Years War was a disaster for ultimate French supremacy: leaving Britain supreme in America, India and elsewhere
But Napoleon had an enormous chance to turn it around. He was worshipped across Europe in liberal and even aristo circles (insanely, to my mind, but there it is). If he had cemented French control of Europe (eg. don't invade Russia?) he would have left French as the hegemonic global culture and English as an outlier, as Europe expanded worldwide
And if he hadn't sold half of the USA and instead developed it, half of North America might now be speaking French
And all that flows from that....
He fucked it up, in true Napoleonic style
I'm happy to split the difference - you're right about the Seven Years War (though as much a rescue for Prussia as it turned out which could easily have been dismembered). Even if Napoleon had done nothing after Tilsit, the British would have continued to agitate in Europe (much as we did against a Europe dominated by the Nazis from 1940-44) and there was of course Iberia.
I suspect Napoleon would have ended up creating new ememies (or the same old enemies) - we often claim we defeated Napoleon at Waterloo (which we did with Prussian help). The fact was the Russians, Austrians and Prussians got to Paris in 1814 and had Wellington failed in Belgium, they had more than enough troops to beat down the Napoleonic army.
The United States expanded primarily by wallet - apart from Louisiana, they bought Florida from Spain and Alaska from Russia. Their biggest triumph was the defeat of Mexixo in 1848.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
No, I don't think so.
Not everyone will agree! But I doubt that The S*n and GBeebies give a rat fuck about the "child" who is the alleged victim. They just want to bash the left, somehow hoping that they manage to turn enough people against the "woke agenda" to make the election winnable.
Big piece in the FT today (that bastion of leftie socialism) with leading Tories admitting defeat and hoping to disappear off for the summer with *something* happening to save them...
This has nothing to do with the Tories. Why are the Mirror so keen on it if it is?
If it is a witch hunt then that's because the BBC has knowingly harboured witches in the past.
Beyond that, it is clearly salacious gossip with no regard to any of the parties involved.
I find it extraordinary that some on the left are trying to pin this on the Tories
Of course the hatred of the Sun newspaper is well documented as is the loathing of the Murdoch press, the same Murdoch that Starmer was socialising with earlier this week
For me this is not political but a story about a well known BBC personality who is coming under great pressure over allegations about his behaviour
I understand Sky have a breaking news item on this for their 10.00 news
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
Have you seen the gagging order against the BBC issued in WFZ vs BBC? https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/2023/1618.html Some people are even bigger fish than BBC presenters. How much chance of that getting coverage now? This isn't politics in the narrow sense. It's money.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
"His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history." [Ken Livingstone voice] You know who else had those abilities? Bonkers stuff.
Yes. Churchill.
Feeble point. Churchill stepped in to organise a defence, unless there is footage of his mid-30s rallies whipping up a war of aggression which I have missed.
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Good points. We should name a London station in honour of him!
It would be dozy to call a place after Nap.
It'd be a good place for a part-y though. (Translate into Polari if not clear.)
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Trying to spot the wood of historical good sense through the trees of anti-French and pro-British hyperbole.
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
More astute observers than you accept what I say. Often they are French
Losing the 7 Years War was a disaster for ultimate French supremacy: leaving Britain supreme in America, India and elsewhere
But Napoleon had an enormous chance to turn it around. He was worshipped across Europe in liberal and even aristo circles (insanely, to my mind, but there it is). If he had cemented French control of Europe (eg. don't invade Russia?) he would have left French as the hegemonic global culture and English as an outlier, as Europe expanded worldwide
And if he hadn't sold half of the USA and instead developed it, half of North America might now be speaking French
And all that flows from that....
He fucked it up, in true Napoleonic style
I'm happy to split the difference - you're right about the Seven Years War (though as much a rescue for Prussia as it turned out which could easily have been dismembered). Even if Napoleon had done nothing after Tilsit, the British would have continued to agitate in Europe (much as we did against a Europe dominated by the Nazis from 1940-44) and there was of course Iberia.
I suspect Napoleon would have ended up creating new ememies (or the same old enemies) - we often claim we defeated Napoleon at Waterloo (which we did with Prussian help). The fact was the Russians, Austrians and Prussians got to Paris in 1814 and had Wellington failed in Belgium, they had more than enough troops to beat down the Napoleonic army.
The United States expanded primarily by wallet - apart from Louisiana, they bought Florida from Spain and Alaska from Russia. Their biggest triumph was the defeat of Mexixo in 1848.
Worth remembering that the Louisiana Purchase was so much more than just what became that state. It was effectively pretty the whole of the Misssippi/Missouri Watershed that wasn't already part of the US. It doubled the size of the US in one go.
Also worth rememering why it was that Napoleon decided to sell it. The French had just suffered a catastrophic defeat in the Caribbean with the successful slave rebellion on Saint-Domingue (which became Haiti). This was entirely down to Napoleon's idiotic decision to reintroduce slavery. Things really could have been very different if he had not done that.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
No, I don't think so.
Not everyone will agree! But I doubt that The S*n and GBeebies give a rat fuck about the "child" who is the alleged victim. They just want to bash the left, somehow hoping that they manage to turn enough people against the "woke agenda" to make the election winnable.
Big piece in the FT today (that bastion of leftie socialism) with leading Tories admitting defeat and hoping to disappear off for the summer with *something* happening to save them...
This has nothing to do with the Tories. Why are the Mirror so keen on it if it is?
If it is a witch hunt then that's because the BBC has knowingly harboured witches in the past.
Beyond that, it is clearly salacious gossip with no regard to any of the parties involved.
I find it extraordinary that some on the left are trying to pin this on the Tories
Of course the hatred of the Sun newspaper is well documented as is the loathing of the Murdoch press, the same Murdoch that Starmer was socialising with earlier this week
For me this is not political but a story about a well known BBC personality who is coming under great pressure over allegations about his behaviour
I understand Sky have a breaking news item on this for their 10.00 news
I really don't get all the adoration for Napoleon - and that's not just because I'm British. So many deaths, all for his vanity.
Napolean almost created a european superstate and you wonder why some adore him?
His strategic and tactical military genius were unparalleled. His Code laid the basis for most of Europe's legal system, based on an equality and protection for the private property of all that was at the time revolutionary. He standardised measurements, leading to the metric system we know and use today.
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
Within France he improved transport and infrastructure, transformed education, and promoted science and discovery. He brought an end to the bloody chaos of the immediate post-revolutionary period and stabilised it such that the French Revolution could go on to inspire revolutionary change around the world, notably leading to the creation of the US.
His opponents represented the forces of monarchy, hierarchy, and inherited privilege, and although they saw him defeated in the short term, there is no doubt that the Napoleonic upheaval ultimately led to a great leap forward in social progress.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
"His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history." [Ken Livingstone voice] You know who else had those abilities? Bonkers stuff.
Yes. Churchill.
Feeble point. Churchill stepped in to organise a defence, unless there is footage of his mid-30s rallies whipping up a war of aggression which I have missed.
I'm only going on what YOU highlighted: His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
The way you seized upon those things as though they are purely negative aspects was an error.
The greatest irony of all: Napoleon was an absolute disaster for France. His failures led directly to the supremacy of England, the English language, an Anglophone world, the English-speaking internet, the humiliation of France in WW1 and WW2, and France, the natural hegemon of Europe, being relegated to 2nd tier status, in language and culture above all else (the most painful defeat of all)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Trying to spot the wood of historical good sense through the trees of anti-French and pro-British hyperbole.
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
Hold on, am I understanding you right... do you think the Reign of Terror was the work of Napoleon? Also, I assume you're referring to Louis XVI.
I think you need to understand the gap of several years between the outbreak of revolution and the rise of Napoleon. It sounds to me like you think he was integral to it as opposed to a beneficiary.
Napoleon's political constituency was the middle classes, who were the big winners from the Revolution as they grabbed cheap property previously owned by the aristocracy and the Church. His pitch to the middle classes was he would ensure they could keep their new gains.
WRT the unnamed BBC presenter. GBeebies have a story with a silhouette of said presenter which has very clearly been outed because obvious.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
No, I don't think so.
Not everyone will agree! But I doubt that The S*n and GBeebies give a rat fuck about the "child" who is the alleged victim. They just want to bash the left, somehow hoping that they manage to turn enough people against the "woke agenda" to make the election winnable.
Big piece in the FT today (that bastion of leftie socialism) with leading Tories admitting defeat and hoping to disappear off for the summer with *something* happening to save them...
This has nothing to do with the Tories. Why are the Mirror so keen on it if it is?
If it is a witch hunt then that's because the BBC has knowingly harboured witches in the past.
Beyond that, it is clearly salacious gossip with no regard to any of the parties involved.
I find it extraordinary that some on the left are trying to pin this on the Tories
Of course the hatred of the Sun newspaper is well documented as is the loathing of the Murdoch press, the same Murdoch that Starmer was socialising with earlier this week
For me this is not political but a story about a well known BBC personality who is coming under great pressure over allegations about his behaviour
I understand Sky have a breaking news item on this for their 10.00 news
Comments
The fighting was otherwise left to his Marshals, Junot, Ney, Massena, Murat and Soult.
I'll criticise Napoleon any time you like but it's a bit unfair to say 'his tactical genius defeated him in Spain.'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZPClewaJLY
He then went back to loudly abusing the Surrey bowlers.
This is why I resent getting old. I want to know what happens next, but in 2050 I will be either 90ish or not there at all.
- those villains didn't really need any historical inspiration
- Waterloo almost came off, probably lost by Ney's impulsiveness and Napoleon not being well. He would of course have lost the subsequent battle against Austria and Russia, but still.
- his useless relatives were a handicap for sure
- none of the armies of the time behaved particularly well
- he represented an existential threat to the old order and Europe's monarchies were never going to allow his republic to survive and succeed. Britain spent the entire period stirring up the rest of Europe towards war on France
-
Not seen one In years.
So, Napoleon saved us from that, at least.
I accept it's not the burning issue of the day, but, still.
But will be ignored. Sigh!
I fear the judge in the Post Office Inquiry is too weak and the Post Office are playing him as they did to all the other courts which have tried to hold them to account. Badenoch is doing fuck all and every day she does fuck all about this she demonstrates that she does not have what it takes to be a leader.
I am so angry about this because this is a scandal caused in great part by the legal profession and by internal investigators behaving very unprofessionally and disgracefully indeed. So it pains me to see my profession behaving so badly - not just in the events which caused this scandal - but now in the inquiry set up to find out the truth and hold them to account.
People have died. It is atrocious.
As for Nottingham, how we can be so careless about life at its most precious moment - when it starts, when there is hope for a new life, an offering to the future - beats me. We seem to value the valueless and disregard what ought to be most precious.
Sept 2015 to Sept 2017
The Independent haven't changed their URL with the word "arrested" in it:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bbc-presenter-suspended-arrested-identity-latest-b2372906.html
The Met are looking almost as big a bunch of w***ers as the BBC. Who do the BBC think they are anyway, graciously putting their own investigation on hold until the police conduct theirs, as if they have a right to tell the police to butt out? Are they trying to take a leaf from the book the Catholic church used to follow until recently? I hope the police tell them to f*** off and publicly. (Unlikely though.)
Plus, he signed away the Louisiana Purchase. lol
Entropy always wins.
lol
The legal profession has got to be like stag's antlers, or peacock's tails.
There's an advantage to being the peacock with the best tail, or the stag with the best antlers. But as a species, it's blooming stupid- huge amounts of energy going into something pointless. Humans, who wasted our spare energy on brains, at least managed to do other stuff with them.
In law, there's an advantage in having the best lawyer, who can make the most favourable argument from the available facts. Our system depends on everyone doing that as best they can, whatever you think of the underlying case. But the risk of that is that huge resources and thought get invested in defending the indefensible. And it is worth organisations creating a culture where that is seen as desirable. There are massive downsides to that, but they're borne by society as a whole. It's in no firm or organisation's interest to be the first to say "sorry, we messed up royally."
Heaven only knows what we do about it, though.
As I said yesterday, this is a witch-hunt against the BBC - and with it woke lefties and all their ilk - rather than some kind of moral crusade. They want to do something - anything - to change the narrative in a way which somehow favours the Tories. Ruined lives as collateral damage? They work at the woke lefty academy don't they, so give over the "innocent" bit.
I got to meet the Duke of Wellington and my brother - who had imbibed freely of the free drinks - whispered loudly as he came round that I should ask him for an apology. But you know me - ever the diplomat.
Naples of course was inspired by Napoleon to rebel against the Bourbons and the rebels set up the Parthenopean Republic. Via Partenope is now one of the main roads near the sea front. (It is said that she founded Naples when fleeing Odysseus.) It was put down by the Bourbons with the help of the English, including Nelson who said he would deal with the rebels as viciously as the Irish rebels had been (in the Wolfe Tone-led rebellion of 1798). The English like to see themselves on the side of freedom but the historical record says otherwise.
Susan Sontag's novel "The Volcano Lover" based on the life of Sir William Hamilton and set at the time of these events is well worth reading.
Whether this person is guilty or not, it has all become quite tawdry and sad - already
Noone has picked up on Starmers inability to talk to.people who ask searching questions.
Nelson's behaviour was nonetheless appalling, in fact, worse than you describe. His deputy had accepted a surrender of the rebels, upon condition they be transported to France, which Nelson repudiated. That was in accordance with the law of war. But, having repudiated the terms of surrender, he ought then to have restored the prisoners to the forts which they had held, with suffiicient powder and shot to make a defence. Instead, he handed them over to Ferdinand and Maria Carlonia for execution.
But, despite everything, project managing it has been one of the best experiences of my life - I loved seeing how buildings are made and thinking about how the design and structure and materials have to work together to create something that is both beautiful but also in harmony with its surroundings - and efficient. We should make self-building easier.
Big piece in the FT today (that bastion of leftie socialism) with leading Tories admitting defeat and hoping to disappear off for the summer with *something* happening to save them...
French was still widely used in high society well into the 20th century (look at any pre-1914 menu, it's in French not English).
The colonial struggle was a close run thing - New Zealand, for example, could easily have ended up a French colony.
Napoleon's legacy was fear - a fear among the ruling aristocratic classes any concession toward the liberal bourgeoisie risked a new terror which would be as profoundly terminal for them as it had been for the French aristocrats including Louis XI.
The attempts of conservative rulers in Russia, Austria and Prussia to hold down the political and economic demands of new social groups created by industrialisation (we see something similar today in China) failed - the last throw of the dice was a war, victory in which would maintain the status quo. Instead, the autarchies were swept away in a revolution parallel to what happened in France but led, not by the liberal middle classes but by the Marxist inspired working classes.
Britain avoided this to a considerable extent though there was social unrest in the 19th century - the Chartists being a good example. The extension of the franchise diffused the tension as more became a direct part of democracy culminating in the radical liberal government of HH Asquith in 1906.
(That may change, and has a bit with this afternoon's revelations. But foolishly reacting to a threat to expose you... ugh on both sides.)
And ultimately... Has this story added to the sum of human happiness? It isn't likely to cause a family reconciliation. It's not obvious that any particular justice has been served. But the media have had fun for a few days.
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1678850513507602432
The Post Office have behaved like this throughout. As an organisation they seem to have utter contempt for judges and the courts. The Board is appointed by the government. I can't help feeling that they're behaving like this because they know the government won't really take - or allow - any action to be taken against them.
The government's strategy is I think what I wrote here - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/05/08/the-cheque-is-in-the-post/.
"To wait until everyone is dead, then quietly bury whatever report is produced while those responsible get away with it and carry on making money."
Napoleon was a great general and a case study in why you shouldn't let generals -- great or small -- rule a country.
Losing the 7 Years War was a disaster for ultimate French supremacy: leaving Britain supreme in America, India and elsewhere
But Napoleon had an enormous chance to turn it around. He was worshipped across Europe in liberal and even aristo circles (insanely, to my mind, but there it is). If he had cemented French control of Europe (eg. don't invade Russia?) he would have left French as the hegemonic global culture and English as an outlier, as Europe expanded worldwide
And if he hadn't sold half of the USA and instead developed it, half of North America might now be speaking French
And all that flows from that....
He fucked it up, in true Napoleonic style
If it is a witch hunt then that's because the BBC has knowingly harboured witches in the past.
Beyond that, it is clearly salacious gossip with no regard to any of the parties involved.
But now we're seriously considering doing another similar project, applying all the lessons of 'what not to do' from last time.
The Bourbons were generally a useless lot though.
I'd guess a month or so before the first primary, so early January maybe?
^ Good for the police. Investigate fast before some non-law enforcement agency or other with its own interests talks to witnesses.
Napoleon did for the French what Brexit is doing to the British.
Trump's attacks on Carroll after the jury found him liable for assaulting her were part of DOJ's decision to decline to defend him in Carroll's 2nd trial. They undermined any pretence that his earlier attacks were about "a desire to serve the government."
https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1678862228181639174
Any why are the GOP moving in that direction (despite the hawks in the Senate)?
Also, I assume you're referring to Louis XVI.
I think you need to understand the gap of several years between the outbreak of revolution and the rise of Napoleon. It sounds to me like you think he was integral to it as opposed to a beneficiary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon's_theorem
Take any triangle. Construct equilateral triangles on its sides, either all pointing outwards or all pointing inwards. Connect their centres, aaaaand ... you've got yourself another equilateral triangle.
Napoleon also sussed that by far the most important rhetorical device was repetition.
Agreed he was nowhere near as cool as Robespierre.
A month or so before the primary is too late to allow a proper primary campaign to get the best candidate through to win for the Democrats.
Trying to avoid being a lame duck for a few extra months isn't worth increasing the risk of letting the GOP have the Oval Office for four years.
Now substitute 'Russian' for 'Nazi...'
The winning move is to wait for the actual facts and base judgements of guilt and innocence on those.
But we cannot really ignore the outcome for him, and France, in the aftermath.
I leave it to historians to argue what was inevitable or not (as much as anything is), but to a casual observer it seems a classic case of biting off too much to consolidate.
I suspect Napoleon would have ended up creating new ememies (or the same old enemies) - we often claim we defeated Napoleon at Waterloo (which we did with Prussian help). The fact was the Russians, Austrians and Prussians got to Paris in 1814 and had Wellington failed in Belgium, they had more than enough troops to beat down the Napoleonic army.
The United States expanded primarily by wallet - apart from Louisiana, they bought Florida from Spain and Alaska from Russia. Their biggest triumph was the defeat of Mexixo in 1848.
BBC presenter suspended over sex claims ‘broke Covid lockdown laws’ to meet young stranger from a dating site
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/23026639/bbc-presenter-sex-claims-broke-lockdown-laws-meet-stranger/
BBC ‘sex pics scandal’ presenter started Instagram chat with teenage follower, 17, using love hearts & kisses
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/23026831/bbc-sex-pics-scandal-presenter-instagram-chat-teenager/
Of course the hatred of the Sun newspaper is well documented as is the loathing of the Murdoch press, the same Murdoch that Starmer was socialising with earlier this week
For me this is not political but a story about a well known BBC personality who is coming under great pressure over allegations about his behaviour
I understand Sky have a breaking news item on this for their 10.00 news
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/09/rupert-murdoch-keir-starmer-labour-party-power-no-10
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/2023/1618.html
Some people are even bigger fish than BBC presenters.
How much chance of that getting coverage now?
This isn't politics in the narrow sense. It's money.
Also worth rememering why it was that Napoleon decided to sell it. The French had just suffered a catastrophic defeat in the Caribbean with the successful slave rebellion on Saint-Domingue (which became Haiti). This was entirely down to Napoleon's idiotic decision to reintroduce slavery. Things really could have been very different if he had not done that.
Has national treasure Boris Johnson handed his WhatsApps over yet?
His ability to seize opportunities, overcome obstacles, and inspire loyalty among his troops and the general public are characteristics that continue to captivate and inspire. It remains one of the greatest stories of history.
The way you seized upon those things as though they are purely negative aspects was an error.