Strange how these welfare payments have developed into sacred cows. First, winter fuel allowance, now matenrity pay, the slightest suggestion they are either unnecessary or in need of reform and a bucketload of ordure falls on the person making a suggestion.
Yet we are happy to continue running a deficit and borrowing at least £100 billion per year which we know is unsupportable. It will have to be substantial tax rises because there is clearly no public stomach for any spending cuts.
The irony is that we're fairly close to running a primary surplus. The deficit = debt interest as a first order approximation.
I do wonder if the eventual outcome of all this is a default or devaluation - the markets won't like it very much, but if we're running a primary surplus that may not matter as much as people think. More of an issue would be what would happen to our banking/pensions sector, which we've regulated in such a way as to force them to hold lots of gilts.
True. Throwing valuable objects (particularly metal) into water is old, old magic. And the oldest Gods live in the water (particularly springs - hence, I suppose, the fountain connection.) Archaeological (is it archaeological if you dive rather than dig?) evidence shows that goes back to pre-Roman Britain at least. An echo of this can be found in the return of excalibur to the water.
It’s remarkable that we still have these deep, primitive, reflexive religious drives
Circumcision is just human sacrifice somewhat attenuated with bogus explanations. The Aztecs were much more honest: they used to pierce their penises with maguey thorns. Then offer the bloodied thorns to the Gods of Tenochtitlan
Scarification, body piercing, tattoos…?
I think religious drives are possibly hardwired (that is, the genetic descendents of those with religious drives outcompeted the genetic descendents of those without) but from a purely scientific point of view it seems unlikely that those specifcally with the urge to sacrifice things in water or pierce/tattoo themselves would actually do better than those who did not - unless, you know, that is actually what the Gods want, and they reward those who do? An easier explanation is that humans ARE hardwired to tradition, and to repeating what our parents and grandparents did, even if we don't know why - strikes me that those with a behavioural bias to tradition could have a genetic advantage in survival. But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Pagan. Offering/prayer to water gods. Reinforced by Christian culture in which the font is a source of blessing.
IIRC Salisbury cathedral installed a rather trendy font and then discovered people kept throwing coins into it.
Yes it’s definitely religious, as discussed above
Fascinating Wiki article on this theme. Votive offerings. Seems to be near-universal across human civilisation
But some were keener than others
“In Europe, votive deposits are known from as early as the Neolithic, with polished axe hoards, reaching a peak in the late Bronze Age. High status artifacts such as armor and weaponry (mostly shields, swords, spears and arrows), fertility and cult symbols, coins, various treasures and animal statuettes (often dogs, oxen and in later periods horses) were common offerings in antiquity.
The votive offerings were sacrificed and buried or more commonly cast into bodies of water or peat bogs, whence they could not possibly have been recovered. In certain cases entire ships have been sacrificed, as in the Danish bog Nydam Mose. Often all the objects in a ritual hoard are broken, possibly 'killing' the objects to put them even further beyond utilitarian use before deposition. The purposeful discarding of valuable items such as swords and spearheads is thought to have had ritual overtones. The items have since been discovered in rivers, lakes and present or former wetlands by construction workers, peat diggers, metal-detectorists, members of the public and archaeologists.”
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
A little harsh. Kemi is easy on the eye, and both Hunt and Cleverly are above-averagely handsome middle aged men. Even Jenrick is no uglier than the averagr politician of 20 years ago. Unless... the fact that I am now of these people's generation means I have entirely different standards... which means to today's 20 somethings I probably look qualitatively no different to how my generation thought William Hague ot Tony Blair looked.
I was referring to their political offering rather than their looks.
One day there is going to be a political party in this country that isn't run by loons, crooks and which takes women's rights seriously.
Sadly, we don't yet have that in this country.
Meanwhile WTF is going on at Euston station?!? That is a tragedy just waiting to happen.
It’s the same as platforms 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly.
The issue with both Euston and those platforms is roughly same. Euston was designed at a time when the station only had 1/6th of the current number of trains / passengers..
As I've said multiple times previously HS2 was badly sold, the speed is a side effect of the capacity improvements but it's the capacity improvements that are essential..
There was a reasonably-far-through-the-sausage-machine plan on the table to four-track the Castlefield Corridor (the section from Piccadilly through Oxford Road and Deansgate to South West Manchester), adding a platform 15 and 16 at Piccadilly. This is, if memory serves, the most congested two-track section in the country. Unfortunately heels were dragged and where there was ample space 15 years ago, after Manchester's recent building boom there are now a lot of skyscrapers right up against the railway, and no space to do it.
Which shows the point of doing the thing while you can, because it never gets easier and the solution in the future is always both harder and more urgent than the solution in the present *cough HS2*.
I cut a bit out of my original reply where I said that the actual approach for Manchester is going to have to be a through Tunnel (ala Bologna and elsewhere) with multiple underground platforms at Manchester for through services.
Manchester basically needs a combined plan for HS2 and NPR because both are unavoidable projects if we want to fix the economy...
Absolutely. The Manchester tunnel is justified by the both Northern Powerhouse and HS2 using it. Which is why I would prioritise it over the Euston link. Accept Old Oak Common will be the terminus station for London for the next twenty to thirty years. Add extra platforms at that station (there's space for them) and put more capacity onto the Elizabeth Line
My prediction is that "add platforms at OOC and increase Liz line capacity", i.e. bugger about with the scope and plans yet again, would cost more and take longer than just doing the thing we planned to do from the start.
Compared with a now unachievable original business case it does add cost. This a question of what is higher priority? Sorting out a chronic lack of railway capacity in the Manchester area or improving connections in London? With no dog either way, I would definitely go for Manchester.
One good thing about Old Oak Common is there is space for more platforms. It shouldn't cost too much in the scheme of things.
One day there is going to be a political party in this country that isn't run by loons, crooks and which takes women's rights seriously.
Sadly, we don't yet have that in this country.
Meanwhile WTF is going on at Euston station?!? That is a tragedy just waiting to happen.
It’s the same as platforms 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly.
The issue with both Euston and those platforms is roughly same. Euston was designed at a time when the station only had 1/6th of the current number of trains / passengers..
As I've said multiple times previously HS2 was badly sold, the speed is a side effect of the capacity improvements but it's the capacity improvements that are essential..
There was a reasonably-far-through-the-sausage-machine plan on the table to four-track the Castlefield Corridor (the section from Piccadilly through Oxford Road and Deansgate to South West Manchester), adding a platform 15 and 16 at Piccadilly. This is, if memory serves, the most congested two-track section in the country. Unfortunately heels were dragged and where there was ample space 15 years ago, after Manchester's recent building boom there are now a lot of skyscrapers right up against the railway, and no space to do it.
Which shows the point of doing the thing while you can, because it never gets easier and the solution in the future is always both harder and more urgent than the solution in the present *cough HS2*.
I cut a bit out of my original reply where I said that the actual approach for Manchester is going to have to be a through Tunnel (ala Bologna and elsewhere) with multiple underground platforms at Manchester for through services.
Manchester basically needs a combined plan for HS2 and NPR because both are unavoidable projects if we want to fix the economy...
Absolutely. The Manchester tunnel is justified by the both Northern Powerhouse and HS2 using it. Which is why I would prioritise it over the Euston link. Accept Old Oak Common will be the terminus station for London for the next twenty to thirty years. Add extra platforms at that station (there's space for them) and put more capacity onto the Elizabeth Line
Except - there is no spare capacity on the Lizzie Line, especially not for the amount required. (believe me I've already checked that in the past)..
But this does emphasis the mess we are in,
Euston needs improvements for capacity reasons at both the mainline and tfl levels. The Tfl work was attached to Crossrail 2, the mainline work attached to HS2 but it really should have been separate projects.
Manchesters HS2 design was a dead end - as I think all of us who talk about it on here agree HS2 and NPR should be being considered together and designed so that both projects can occur.
Worth saying Tottenham Court Road's Lizzie Line took so long because all the ground work for Crossrail 2 was done as part of the CR1 project as it was known to be the main interchange point.
They have the option of buying more trainsets for the Elizabeth Line. They should take that option.
Does that help? If at peak times you can handle say 1 train every 3 mins through the route, and you are already achieving that, ordering further rolling stock is of very little use.
There's a bit of potential there. At the moment, most of the trains from the Shenfield/Romford branch only go as far west as Paddington. I think lack of trains is the only thing stopping them going a bit further west.
But yes, the Elizabeth line is pretty full these days.
True. Throwing valuable objects (particularly metal) into water is old, old magic. And the oldest Gods live in the water (particularly springs - hence, I suppose, the fountain connection.) Archaeological (is it archaeological if you dive rather than dig?) evidence shows that goes back to pre-Roman Britain at least. An echo of this can be found in the return of excalibur to the water.
It’s remarkable that we still have these deep, primitive, reflexive religious drives
Circumcision is just human sacrifice somewhat attenuated with bogus explanations. The Aztecs were much more honest: they used to pierce their penises with maguey thorns. Then offer the bloodied thorns to the Gods of Tenochtitlan
Scarification, body piercing, tattoos…?
I think religious drives are possibly hardwired (that is, the genetic descendents of those with religious drives outcompeted the genetic descendents of those without) but from a purely scientific point of view it seems unlikely that those specifcally with the urge to sacrifice things in water or pierce/tattoo themselves would actually do better than those who did not - unless, you know, that is actually what the Gods want, and they reward those who do? An easier explanation is that humans ARE hardwired to tradition, and to repeating what our parents and grandparents did, even if we don't know why - strikes me that those with a behavioural bias to tradition could have a genetic advantage in survival. But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Pretty good theories
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that tattoos, piercings are religious. You are harming yourself permanently, and the exercise is painful
Why on earth would you do that? It must be religious, you are propitiating the gods, even if you don’t realise it
The Moche of Peru used to cut off their own noses and lips to honour their not-at-all-freaky Tarantula God, that’s just one step further from a piercing
Some Moche ceramics I saw in Lima. It was once thought these statuettes were imaginative, now we know the Moche really did this:
I sense Strides MPs may divide quite evenly between Cleverly and Tugendhat and some will probably go to Jenrick too (weird patterns) so unless there's a big event or a miracle it does look like Kemi v Jenrick
Between Scylla and Charybdis but without the charm. Starmer is a very lucky boy. All that swanky new gear and now this.
Badenoch told the BBC last night that she has had "maternity leave" three times.
Yet according to Guardian blog yesterday Ashcroft's memoire of her says when she was at Spectator and had second child she resigned rather than take maternity leave.
"She told me she thought it would be unfair to ask us to keep her job open while she was on maternity leave,” Fraser Nelson, the Spectator editor, is quoted in the book as saying."
She's really made a mess of this issue. Can she come back in time to make it to the final 2 ? I suspect Jenrick is the rights flag bearer for certain.
I sense Strides MPs may divide quite evenly between Cleverly and Tugendhat and some will probably go to Jenrick too (weird patterns) so unless there's a big event or a miracle it does look like Kemi v Jenrick
Between Scylla and Charybdis but without the charm. Starmer is a very lucky boy. All that swanky new gear and now this.
Let's just hope that some of that luck spills over onto the country that he runs.
Perhaps if we finish the slow human sacrifice of Sir Kir Royale Starmer (because that is obvs what this is: the ritual killing of the king (see the Golden Bough)) then the Gods will stop this fucking endless frigid rain
True. Throwing valuable objects (particularly metal) into water is old, old magic. And the oldest Gods live in the water (particularly springs - hence, I suppose, the fountain connection.) Archaeological (is it archaeological if you dive rather than dig?) evidence shows that goes back to pre-Roman Britain at least. An echo of this can be found in the return of excalibur to the water.
It’s remarkable that we still have these deep, primitive, reflexive religious drives
Circumcision is just human sacrifice somewhat attenuated with bogus explanations. The Aztecs were much more honest: they used to pierce their penises with maguey thorns. Then offer the bloodied thorns to the Gods of Tenochtitlan
Scarification, body piercing, tattoos…?
I think religious drives are possibly hardwired (that is, the genetic descendents of those with religious drives outcompeted the genetic descendents of those without) but from a purely scientific point of view it seems unlikely that those specifcally with the urge to sacrifice things in water or pierce/tattoo themselves would actually do better than those who did not - unless, you know, that is actually what the Gods want, and they reward those who do? An easier explanation is that humans ARE hardwired to tradition, and to repeating what our parents and grandparents did, even if we don't know why - strikes me that those with a behavioural bias to tradition could have a genetic advantage in survival. But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Pretty good theories
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that tattoos, piercings are religious. You are harming yourself permanently, and the exercise is painful
Why on earth would you do that? It must be religious, you are propitiating the gods, even if you don’t realise it
The Moche of Peru used to cut off their own noses and lips to honour their not-at-all-freaky Tarantula God, that’s just one step further from a piercing
Some Moche ceramics I saw in Lima. It was once thought these statuettes were imaginative, now we know the Moche really did this:
No wonder they capitulated so surprisingly when the Spanish with their slightly less terrifying God arrived.
A little harsh. Kemi is easy on the eye, and both Hunt and Cleverly are above-averagely handsome middle aged men. Even Jenrick is no uglier than the averagr politician of 20 years ago. Unless... the fact that I am now of these people's generation means I have entirely different standards... which means to today's 20 somethings I probably look qualitatively no different to how my generation thought William Hague ot Tony Blair looked.
I was referring to their political offering rather than their looks.
But even then....
Badenoch is genuinely pretty. Not beautiful but definitely pretty
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Truss is committing a basic but oft-repeated political error: I do not like x x does not like y therefore I like y.
True. Throwing valuable objects (particularly metal) into water is old, old magic. And the oldest Gods live in the water (particularly springs - hence, I suppose, the fountain connection.) Archaeological (is it archaeological if you dive rather than dig?) evidence shows that goes back to pre-Roman Britain at least. An echo of this can be found in the return of excalibur to the water.
It’s remarkable that we still have these deep, primitive, reflexive religious drives
Circumcision is just human sacrifice somewhat attenuated with bogus explanations. The Aztecs were much more honest: they used to pierce their penises with maguey thorns. Then offer the bloodied thorns to the Gods of Tenochtitlan
Scarification, body piercing, tattoos…?
I think religious drives are possibly hardwired (that is, the genetic descendents of those with religious drives outcompeted the genetic descendents of those without) but from a purely scientific point of view it seems unlikely that those specifcally with the urge to sacrifice things in water or pierce/tattoo themselves would actually do better than those who did not - unless, you know, that is actually what the Gods want, and they reward those who do? An easier explanation is that humans ARE hardwired to tradition, and to repeating what our parents and grandparents did, even if we don't know why - strikes me that those with a behavioural bias to tradition could have a genetic advantage in survival. But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Pretty good theories
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that tattoos, piercings are religious. You are harming yourself permanently, and the exercise is painful
Why on earth would you do that? It must be religious, you are propitiating the gods, even if you don’t realise it
The Moche of Peru used to cut off their own noses and lips to honour their not-at-all-freaky Tarantula God, that’s just one step further from a piercing
Some Moche ceramics I saw in Lima. It was once thought these statuettes were imaginative, now we know the Moche really did this:
No wonder they capitulated so surprisingly when the Spanish with their slightly less terrifying God arrived.
That was the Aztecs and Incas and others. The Moche died out around the 9th century
There is some evidence the Moche were SO freaky even the other sacrifice-our-children MesoAmerican cultures thought they were a bit “off”
Perhaps if we finish the slow human sacrifice of Sir Kir Royale Starmer (because that is obvs what this is: the ritual killing of the king (see the Golden Bough)) then the Gods will stop this fucking endless frigid rain
Lamentations for the disaster at OT. Entirely appropriate in my view.
One day there is going to be a political party in this country that isn't run by loons, crooks and which takes women's rights seriously.
Sadly, we don't yet have that in this country.
Meanwhile WTF is going on at Euston station?!? That is a tragedy just waiting to happen.
It’s the same as platforms 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly.
The issue with both Euston and those platforms is roughly same. Euston was designed at a time when the station only had 1/6th of the current number of trains / passengers..
As I've said multiple times previously HS2 was badly sold, the speed is a side effect of the capacity improvements but it's the capacity improvements that are essential..
There was a reasonably-far-through-the-sausage-machine plan on the table to four-track the Castlefield Corridor (the section from Piccadilly through Oxford Road and Deansgate to South West Manchester), adding a platform 15 and 16 at Piccadilly. This is, if memory serves, the most congested two-track section in the country. Unfortunately heels were dragged and where there was ample space 15 years ago, after Manchester's recent building boom there are now a lot of skyscrapers right up against the railway, and no space to do it.
Which shows the point of doing the thing while you can, because it never gets easier and the solution in the future is always both harder and more urgent than the solution in the present *cough HS2*.
I cut a bit out of my original reply where I said that the actual approach for Manchester is going to have to be a through Tunnel (ala Bologna and elsewhere) with multiple underground platforms at Manchester for through services.
Manchester basically needs a combined plan for HS2 and NPR because both are unavoidable projects if we want to fix the economy...
Absolutely. The Manchester tunnel is justified by the both Northern Powerhouse and HS2 using it. Which is why I would prioritise it over the Euston link. Accept Old Oak Common will be the terminus station for London for the next twenty to thirty years. Add extra platforms at that station (there's space for them) and put more capacity onto the Elizabeth Line
My prediction is that "add platforms at OOC and increase Liz line capacity", i.e. bugger about with the scope and plans yet again, would cost more and take longer than just doing the thing we planned to do from the start.
Compared with a now unachievable original business case it does add cost. This a question of what is higher priority? Sorting out a chronic lack of railway capacity in the Manchester area or improving connections in London? With no dog either way, I would definitely go for Manchester.
One good thing about Old Oak Common is there is space for more platforms. It shouldn't cost too much in the scheme of things.
One day there is going to be a political party in this country that isn't run by loons, crooks and which takes women's rights seriously.
Sadly, we don't yet have that in this country.
Meanwhile WTF is going on at Euston station?!? That is a tragedy just waiting to happen.
It’s the same as platforms 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly.
The issue with both Euston and those platforms is roughly same. Euston was designed at a time when the station only had 1/6th of the current number of trains / passengers..
As I've said multiple times previously HS2 was badly sold, the speed is a side effect of the capacity improvements but it's the capacity improvements that are essential..
There was a reasonably-far-through-the-sausage-machine plan on the table to four-track the Castlefield Corridor (the section from Piccadilly through Oxford Road and Deansgate to South West Manchester), adding a platform 15 and 16 at Piccadilly. This is, if memory serves, the most congested two-track section in the country. Unfortunately heels were dragged and where there was ample space 15 years ago, after Manchester's recent building boom there are now a lot of skyscrapers right up against the railway, and no space to do it.
Which shows the point of doing the thing while you can, because it never gets easier and the solution in the future is always both harder and more urgent than the solution in the present *cough HS2*.
I cut a bit out of my original reply where I said that the actual approach for Manchester is going to have to be a through Tunnel (ala Bologna and elsewhere) with multiple underground platforms at Manchester for through services.
Manchester basically needs a combined plan for HS2 and NPR because both are unavoidable projects if we want to fix the economy...
Absolutely. The Manchester tunnel is justified by the both Northern Powerhouse and HS2 using it. Which is why I would prioritise it over the Euston link. Accept Old Oak Common will be the terminus station for London for the next twenty to thirty years. Add extra platforms at that station (there's space for them) and put more capacity onto the Elizabeth Line
Except - there is no spare capacity on the Lizzie Line, especially not for the amount required. (believe me I've already checked that in the past)..
But this does emphasis the mess we are in,
Euston needs improvements for capacity reasons at both the mainline and tfl levels. The Tfl work was attached to Crossrail 2, the mainline work attached to HS2 but it really should have been separate projects.
Manchesters HS2 design was a dead end - as I think all of us who talk about it on here agree HS2 and NPR should be being considered together and designed so that both projects can occur.
Worth saying Tottenham Court Road's Lizzie Line took so long because all the ground work for Crossrail 2 was done as part of the CR1 project as it was known to be the main interchange point.
They have the option of buying more trainsets for the Elizabeth Line. They should take that option.
Did you not read my post earlier on - there are 10 new trains coming.
True. Throwing valuable objects (particularly metal) into water is old, old magic. And the oldest Gods live in the water (particularly springs - hence, I suppose, the fountain connection.) Archaeological (is it archaeological if you dive rather than dig?) evidence shows that goes back to pre-Roman Britain at least. An echo of this can be found in the return of excalibur to the water.
It’s remarkable that we still have these deep, primitive, reflexive religious drives
Circumcision is just human sacrifice somewhat attenuated with bogus explanations. The Aztecs were much more honest: they used to pierce their penises with maguey thorns. Then offer the bloodied thorns to the Gods of Tenochtitlan
Scarification, body piercing, tattoos…?
I think religious drives are possibly hardwired (that is, the genetic descendents of those with religious drives outcompeted the genetic descendents of those without) but from a purely scientific point of view it seems unlikely that those specifcally with the urge to sacrifice things in water or pierce/tattoo themselves would actually do better than those who did not - unless, you know, that is actually what the Gods want, and they reward those who do? An easier explanation is that humans ARE hardwired to tradition, and to repeating what our parents and grandparents did, even if we don't know why - strikes me that those with a behavioural bias to tradition could have a genetic advantage in survival. But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Pretty good theories
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that tattoos, piercings are religious. You are harming yourself permanently, and the exercise is painful
Why on earth would you do that? It must be religious, you are propitiating the gods, even if you don’t realise it
The Moche of Peru used to cut off their own noses and lips to honour their not-at-all-freaky Tarantula God, that’s just one step further from a piercing
Some Moche ceramics I saw in Lima. It was once thought these statuettes were imaginative, now we know the Moche really did this:
No wonder they capitulated so surprisingly when the Spanish with their slightly less terrifying God arrived.
That was the Aztecs and Incas and others. The Moche died out around the 9th century
There is some evidence the Moche were SO freaky even the other sacrifice-our-children MesoAmerican cultures thought they were a bit “off”
Puts me in mind of Mark Lamarr's story of being on coke, and of being taken to one side by Shaun Ryder and told he was being a bit lairy. Being thought of as a bit weirdly bloodthirsty by the MesoAmericans must be very much like being thought of as a bit lairy by Shaun Ryder.
Northern Peru is barely trowelled by archaeologists. So much is left to dig up they are barely scraping the surface
When I was there researching this mad Moche civilisation I learned of one German dig that was, apparently, finding interesting stuff. So I got the location and found a map (pre Google maps) and set off but every road was either impassable or the police stopped me (dangerous terrorists etc)
Eventually I parked the car in a huff and set off across the semi desert on foot but it was pointless. I had no chance of finding it. Scared of getting lost or shot I scrunched back to the car and then I realised I really was SCRUNCHING - I was standing in the middle of a melted Moche adobe pyramid (this is not surprising there are 100s of them)
And the scrunching noise was me breaking bits of pottery inscribed with the iconography of the Tarantula God. I still have several of these shards, in my flat, to this day
True. Throwing valuable objects (particularly metal) into water is old, old magic. And the oldest Gods live in the water (particularly springs - hence, I suppose, the fountain connection.) Archaeological (is it archaeological if you dive rather than dig?) evidence shows that goes back to pre-Roman Britain at least. An echo of this can be found in the return of excalibur to the water.
It’s remarkable that we still have these deep, primitive, reflexive religious drives
Circumcision is just human sacrifice somewhat attenuated with bogus explanations. The Aztecs were much more honest: they used to pierce their penises with maguey thorns. Then offer the bloodied thorns to the Gods of Tenochtitlan
Scarification, body piercing, tattoos…?
I think religious drives are possibly hardwired (that is, the genetic descendents of those with religious drives outcompeted the genetic descendents of those without) but from a purely scientific point of view it seems unlikely that those specifcally with the urge to sacrifice things in water or pierce/tattoo themselves would actually do better than those who did not - unless, you know, that is actually what the Gods want, and they reward those who do? An easier explanation is that humans ARE hardwired to tradition, and to repeating what our parents and grandparents did, even if we don't know why - strikes me that those with a behavioural bias to tradition could have a genetic advantage in survival. But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Pretty good theories
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that tattoos, piercings are religious. You are harming yourself permanently, and the exercise is painful
Why on earth would you do that? It must be religious, you are propitiating the gods, even if you don’t realise it
The Moche of Peru used to cut off their own noses and lips to honour their not-at-all-freaky Tarantula God, that’s just one step further from a piercing
Some Moche ceramics I saw in Lima. It was once thought these statuettes were imaginative, now we know the Moche really did this:
No wonder they capitulated so surprisingly when the Spanish with their slightly less terrifying God arrived.
That was the Aztecs and Incas and others. The Moche died out around the 9th century
There is some evidence the Moche were SO freaky even the other sacrifice-our-children MesoAmerican cultures thought they were a bit “off”
Puts me in mind of Mark Lamarr's story of being on coke, and of being taken to one side by Shaun Ryder and told he was being a bit lairy. Being thought of as a bit weirdly bloodthirsty by the MesoAmericans must be very much like being thought of as a bit lairy by Shaun Ryder.
True. Throwing valuable objects (particularly metal) into water is old, old magic. And the oldest Gods live in the water (particularly springs - hence, I suppose, the fountain connection.) Archaeological (is it archaeological if you dive rather than dig?) evidence shows that goes back to pre-Roman Britain at least. An echo of this can be found in the return of excalibur to the water.
It’s remarkable that we still have these deep, primitive, reflexive religious drives
Circumcision is just human sacrifice somewhat attenuated with bogus explanations. The Aztecs were much more honest: they used to pierce their penises with maguey thorns. Then offer the bloodied thorns to the Gods of Tenochtitlan
Scarification, body piercing, tattoos…?
I think religious drives are possibly hardwired (that is, the genetic descendents of those with religious drives outcompeted the genetic descendents of those without) but from a purely scientific point of view it seems unlikely that those specifcally with the urge to sacrifice things in water or pierce/tattoo themselves would actually do better than those who did not - unless, you know, that is actually what the Gods want, and they reward those who do? An easier explanation is that humans ARE hardwired to tradition, and to repeating what our parents and grandparents did, even if we don't know why - strikes me that those with a behavioural bias to tradition could have a genetic advantage in survival. But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Religion and similar belief systems are the primary lever that older men use to get younger men to put their lives (in this world) on the line to defend or enhance their power through aggression and conquest. As well as fostering co-operation and obedience more generally. In historical and pre-historical times, that carried considerable evolutionary advantage.
Islamic suicide bombings are an extreme, modern day example of what a strict belief system can get people to do.
Look at the Vikings. Valhalla was essentially their seventy virgins.
Interesting article in Unherd. 'It is largely forgotten that when Thatcher replaced Ted Heath in 1975, she was also seen as a lightweight who would be Labour’s “secret weapon”. The former chancellor and her leadership rival, Reginald Maudling, described her victory as the “darkest day in the history of the Tory party”. And polls in 1978 suggested the Tories would enjoy a significant increase in support if it were to return the leadership to Heath. What actually won her power in 1979 was not her radicalism or iron will, but Labour’s total failure in government. “We lost the Election because people didn’t get their dustbins emptied, because commuters were angry about train disruption and because of too much union power,” James Callaghan argued, lamenting the Winter of Discontent which upended his premiership. Rishi Sunak could well say the same of his own time in government...
Those close to Starmer believe that Robert Jenrick has come closest to having the kind of political analysis that could be most problematic for Labour. The 14 years of Tory government were very bad, Jenrick states, because the government showed itself incapable of delivering the systemic reforms that would allow it to deliver what it promised. Only by clearing away the bureaucratic and legal obstacles binding the government’s hands can voters’ wishes be delivered — from reducing immigration and bogus asylum claims to improving economic growth and the performance of public services. This is the message Labour fears — but not the messenger. The words they used to describe him included “weird” and “extreme”. They also believe he reaches too quickly for old Thatcherite solutions to today’s problems. Jenrick has alighted on the systemic nature of Britain’s ills, but has yet to really embrace the new world to which Britain belongs — a world that requires more than reheated Thatcherism if Britain is to prosper. To those close to Starmer, Jenrick looks more like a second William Hague — or even Iain Duncan Smith — than a David Cameron, let alone a Margaret Thatcher.'
Interesting article in Unherd. 'It is largely forgotten that when Thatcher replaced Ted Heath in 1975, she was also seen as a lightweight who would be Labour’s “secret weapon”. The former chancellor and her leadership rival, Reginald Maudling, described her victory as the “darkest day in the history of the Tory party”. And polls in 1978 suggested the Tories would enjoy a significant increase in support if it were to return the leadership to Heath. What actually won her power in 1979 was not her radicalism or iron will, but Labour’s total failure in government. “We lost the Election because people didn’t get their dustbins emptied, because commuters were angry about train disruption and because of too much union power,” James Callaghan argued, lamenting the Winter of Discontent which upended his premiership. Rishi Sunak could well say the same of his own time in government...
Those close to Starmer believe that Robert Jenrick has come closest to having the kind of political analysis that could be most problematic for Labour. The 14 years of Tory government were very bad, Jenrick states, because the government showed itself incapable of delivering the systemic reforms that would allow it to deliver what it promised. Only by clearing away the bureaucratic and legal obstacles binding the government’s hands can voters’ wishes be delivered — from reducing immigration and bogus asylum claims to improving economic growth and the performance of public services. This is the message Labour fears — but not the messenger. The words they used to describe him included “weird” and “extreme”. They also believe he reaches too quickly for old Thatcherite solutions to today’s problems. Jenrick has alighted on the systemic nature of Britain’s ills, but has yet to really embrace the new world to which Britain belongs — a world that requires more than reheated Thatcherism if Britain is to prosper. To those close to Starmer, Jenrick looks more like a second William Hague — or even Iain Duncan Smith — than a David Cameron, let alone a Margaret Thatcher.'
By contrast, Tugendhat and Cleverly are seen as more effective messengers, but with ineffective messages. Tugendhat does not share Jenrick’s belief in the systemic failure of the British state — arguing that Britain has simply lost its dynamism because it has allowed itself to be run by the “rule of lawyers” rather than the rule of law. Cleverly, in contrast, says Britain just needs some of Ronald Reagan’s optimistic spirit. Neither troubles Labour — yet.The candidate that Starmer’s team is least sure about is Badenoch. The size of her personality and willingness to speak her mind makes her a dangerous opponent. Her instinctive, confident conservatism also appears fresh in a way Jenrick’s does not. And yet she is also seen as potentially self-destructive in a way the others are not. She has the self-confidence of Thatcher, but does she have the discipline and political skill to navigate the challenges of opposition? After going on Times Radio to declare current rates of maternity pay “excessive” the question raised by T.E. Utley becomes pertinent once again: Is she willing to put aside her devotion to doctrine to avoid the plainly politically suicidal? If she wants to win, the answer must be yes.' https://unherd.com/2024/09/the-tory-contender-labour-fears/?tl_inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3&utm_source=UnHerd+Today&utm_campaign=ce0ce17957-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_09_30_08_49&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_79fd0df946-ce0ce17957-[LIST_EMAIL_ID]
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Truss is committing a basic but oft-repeated political error: I do not like x x does not like y therefore I like y.
The Davos global elite really don't like idea of Putin dropping a nuclear bomb on London, so I think we should welcome the idea.
ETH goes into a bank and asks to cash a cheque. He is told he needs ID. He doesn't have any. Is there nothing he can do? "Well", said the Cashier, when Tiger Woods was caught out like that he putted a ball all the way across the hall of the bank into a cup to prove who he was. And when Andre Agassi was similarly caught he manged to lob a ball into the same cup with his racket. What can you do Mr Ten Hag?"
"I haven't got a clue," he says, "my mind is completely blank".
Cashier: "Will that be large notes or small notes Mr Ten Hag?
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
That depends what happens to Reform. If they continue to gain votes, and pick up some decent council wins or a Westminster byelection, then the next leader after Jenrick might be further to the right.
I think Jenrick will make it to the next election. He might be a thoroughly lightweight, faux culture warrior type with a few shadows hanging over his past conduct, but he speaks fluently and doesn't seem as incompetent at the political game as everyone seems to assume.
If I am right and Jenrick goes in two years (and incidentally Seldon wrote a piece yesterday saying he would only last two years) then they may well pick someone more to the radical right in order to take on Reform. Still likely to lose in 2028 and then they might start thinking about the centre ground again.
But I may well be wrong and @Leon right - England, like rest of europe, about to embrace the radical right and anti-migration populism. Certainly if Labour continue to make a total horlicks of everything they touch then that may well be on the cards.
The helpful political news for them is that at least in numbers terms absolute net migration is inevitably going to come down over the next couple of years, purely as a function of maths.
Possible that small boat crossings decline too, as it doesn't seem to have a particularly big summer in the Med this year so the pipeline for next summer might be down. Certainly the numbers in the latter part of this season have been substantially down on earlier in the year. I doubt that has anything to do with the change of government, but it's optically convenient.
Question is whether anti-elite populism keeps surging regardless. It's not all about immigration after all. Partly that is in Labour's gift: they need to give people hope and a bit of optimism.
The real objection of the far right is not only to immigration present and future, it is to migration that has already happened. Once migration slows down (if it does) then the question of whether the far right turns its attention to migration past is important.
“Remigration” is the term the Far Right uses, for this
I reckon this ugly idea is going to enter the mainstream of politics, via the rise of the Far Right parties across Europe. eg Austria yesterday. Once these parties start actually winning elections, the dam breaks
The far right gets about 35% of the vote across Europe. This is probably a ceiling for the moment. In normal politics people would be forming coalitions with them (NL the exception ) but left \centrists\ soft right are having a boycott.
In Saxony we have the odd spectacle of the CDU refusing to go in to coalition with "the heirs to Hitler" but quite content to fom a government with "the heirs to Stalin". Who of course murdered many more people.
How long this will continue who knows. But we are getting to elections where something will have to break.
Merz is more rightwing than Merkel as CDU Federal leader, he may do a deal with the SPD or Greens over the AfD (even if his preferred coalition partner would be the FDP). I suspect he would draw the line at doing a deal including Linke or the BSW over the AfD
As the CDU's own rules forbid them from going into coalition with the AfD or the Left, neither of those will happen. And there is no question of the CDU working with any of AfD BSW or the Left at the federal level. But at the state level the CDU has already shown that it is willing to work with both the BSW and the Left, but not the AfD. So I would say you are definitely wrong, at least as far as this and the next parliament are concerned.
For now but rules can be changed.
Forza Italia is already working with Lega and Brothers of Italy in the current Italian Meloni led government, the PP in Spain is working with Vox, the Swedish Moderates are governing with the backing of the Sweden Democrats and the Dutch VVD are now in government with the PVV. So in many western European countries centre right parties are now willing to work with the nationalist populist hard right. Even if in Germany, France, Austria and for the moment the UK they are not.
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
That depends what happens to Reform. If they continue to gain votes, and pick up some decent council wins or a Westminster byelection, then the next leader after Jenrick might be further to the right.
I think Jenrick will make it to the next election. He might be a thoroughly lightweight, faux culture warrior type with a few shadows hanging over his past conduct, but he speaks fluently and doesn't seem as incompetent at the political game as everyone seems to assume.
If I am right and Jenrick goes in two years (and incidentally Seldon wrote a piece yesterday saying he would only last two years) then they may well pick someone more to the radical right in order to take on Reform. Still likely to lose in 2028 and then they might start thinking about the centre ground again.
But I may well be wrong and @Leon right - England, like rest of europe, about to embrace the radical right and anti-migration populism. Certainly if Labour continue to make a total horlicks of everything they touch then that may well be on the cards.
The helpful political news for them is that at least in numbers terms absolute net migration is inevitably going to come down over the next couple of years, purely as a function of maths.
Possible that small boat crossings decline too, as it doesn't seem to have a particularly big summer in the Med this year so the pipeline for next summer might be down. Certainly the numbers in the latter part of this season have been substantially down on earlier in the year. I doubt that has anything to do with the change of government, but it's optically convenient.
Question is whether anti-elite populism keeps surging regardless. It's not all about immigration after all. Partly that is in Labour's gift: they need to give people hope and a bit of optimism.
The real objection of the far right is not only to immigration present and future, it is to migration that has already happened. Once migration slows down (if it does) then the question of whether the far right turns its attention to migration past is important.
“Remigration” is the term the Far Right uses, for this
I reckon this ugly idea is going to enter the mainstream of politics, via the rise of the Far Right parties across Europe. eg Austria yesterday. Once these parties start actually winning elections, the dam breaks
The far right gets about 35% of the vote across Europe. This is probably a ceiling for the moment. In normal politics people would be forming coalitions with them (NL the exception ) but left \centrists\ soft right are having a boycott.
In Saxony we have the odd spectacle of the CDU refusing to go in to coalition with "the heirs to Hitler" but quite content to fom a government with "the heirs to Stalin". Who of course murdered many more people.
How long this will continue who knows. But we are getting to elections where something will have to break.
Merz is more rightwing than Merkel as CDU Federal leader, he may do a deal with the SPD or Greens over the AfD (even if his preferred coalition partner would be the FDP). I suspect he would draw the line at doing a deal including Linke or the BSW over the AfD
What kind of government can he form ? It all comes down to the electoral arithmetic. Merz will crack and do a deal with the BSW if he has to. A conservative communist alliance. Its insane.
No, Merz would do a a deal with the FDP or the Greens or a grand coalition with the SPD or else stay in opposition
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Truss is committing a basic but oft-repeated political error: I do not like x x does not like y therefore I like y.
The Davos global elite really don't like idea of Putin dropping a nuclear bomb on London, so I think we should welcome the idea.
Of course the UK could then drop a nuclear bomb on Moscow in return.
Though if Trump wins Starmer will clearly just follow what he decides in any peace terms, he and Lammy clearly have less interest in supporting Zelensky to total victory than Truss, Boris, Healey and Shapps and Wallace did.
Indeed they are more likely to take on Trump on his support for Netanyahu than his willingness to negotiate with Putin. If Harris wins again they would just follow what the US decides though I can't see Harris allowing missile attacks in Russia itself either anymore than Biden has even if she provides Zelensky with more arms than Putin. Zelensky's best bet in the US election would have been a Haley win but that is now long gone.
As Haley remarked '"This is bigger than Ukraine," Haley said. "This is a war about freedom, and it's one we have to win." Haley called Russian President Vladimir Putin a tyrant and refuted claims the conflict is purely a territorial dispute -- comments targeted at Trump's close relationship with Putin and DeSantis's initial comments about the war. ' https://www.rferl.org/a/us-nikki-haley-ukraine-support-2024-election/32445633.html
Badenoch told the BBC last night that she has had "maternity leave" three times.
Yet according to Guardian blog yesterday Ashcroft's memoire of her says when she was at Spectator and had second child she resigned rather than take maternity leave.
"She told me she thought it would be unfair to ask us to keep her job open while she was on maternity leave,” Fraser Nelson, the Spectator editor, is quoted in the book as saying."
She's really made a mess of this issue. Can she come back in time to make it to the final 2 ? I suspect Jenrick is the rights flag bearer for certain.
Badenoch had made a hash of this and is suffering. But then Jenrick's answer to the donation question was poor and he's gotten away with it..
Feels to me like Tory MPs still haven’t learnt their lesson. Members (and then the electorate) decisively chose Johnson, and utterly rejected Jeremy Hunt. Johnson casually defenestrated by MPs. Members decisively choose Truss, utterly rejecting Sunak. Tory MPs think it a good idea to instead fight the election with a duo of Sunak and Hunt.
If this most “sophisticated” electorate think it wise to keep her name off the ballot, they deserve everything coming to them.
The counter argument - all the current candidates are crap because Johnson's defenestration removed the counter argument from the party - hence you have 4 right wing candidates because the wet / centralist wing of the party lost the middle management in 2020.
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Do the Davos global elite include former Davos panellists who promise to fix the international trade system and happen to be called Liz Truss? Or the British-Swiss Parliamentary Ski team who stay all expenses paid at Davos and include Liz Truss? Well, included.
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
The only way that Jenrick (or whoever the Tories elect) will be out in two years will be if they're so god-awful at PMQs that Starmer trounces them every single week, AND run such an inept CCHQ operation that it's worse than Sunak managed during the last General Election. Neither of those are especially plausible scenarios.
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Do the Davos global elite include former Davos panellists who promise to fix the international trade system and happen to be called Liz Truss? Or the British-Swiss Parliamentary Ski team who stay all expenses paid at Davos and include Liz Truss? Well, included.
Perks for Parliamentarians is a scandal that's just going to snowball.
Feels to me like Tory MPs still haven’t learnt their lesson. Members (and then the electorate) decisively chose Johnson, and utterly rejected Jeremy Hunt. Johnson casually defenestrated by MPs. Members decisively choose Truss, utterly rejecting Sunak. Tory MPs think it a good idea to instead fight the election with a duo of Sunak and Hunt.
If this most “sophisticated” electorate think it wise to keep her name off the ballot, they deserve everything coming to them.
The counter argument - all the current candidates are crap because Johnson's defenestration removed the counter argument from the party - hence you have 4 right wing candidates because the wet / centralist wing of the party lost the middle management in 2020.
I suspect that Badenoch has -probably- missed out on the final two now. Slight chance she squeezes in at the expense of Cleverly / Tugendhat.
This one might be a good contest to lose though.
I have posted before that imho she's not yet ready for prime time. Maybe yesterday confirm this.
Lose gracefully now and be available in two years when Jenrick is ousted.
FWIW I think she'd be an interesting LOTO but she wont lead them back to office.
Badenoch is 44 years old and acts like a not particularly mature teenager. When do you think she will be ready for prime time?
I do agree assumptions behind policies should be challenged and changed when they don't deliver the best balance of outcomes. There's a good example of that with Winter Fuel Payment. Maternity pay needs to balance costs for business against making childcare and employment work for mothers.
I see she's ditched the specs (presumably for contacts) which shows that she's put some not particulalry deep thought into how she comes over.
Perhaps the undesirability of face furniture (of the expensive variety especially) is a Starmer effect.
Interesting article in Unherd. 'It is largely forgotten that when Thatcher replaced Ted Heath in 1975, she was also seen as a lightweight who would be Labour’s “secret weapon”. The former chancellor and her leadership rival, Reginald Maudling, described her victory as the “darkest day in the history of the Tory party”. And polls in 1978 suggested the Tories would enjoy a significant increase in support if it were to return the leadership to Heath. What actually won her power in 1979 was not her radicalism or iron will, but Labour’s total failure in government. “We lost the Election because people didn’t get their dustbins emptied, because commuters were angry about train disruption and because of too much union power,” James Callaghan argued, lamenting the Winter of Discontent which upended his premiership. Rishi Sunak could well say the same of his own time in government...
Those close to Starmer believe that Robert Jenrick has come closest to having the kind of political analysis that could be most problematic for Labour. The 14 years of Tory government were very bad, Jenrick states, because the government showed itself incapable of delivering the systemic reforms that would allow it to deliver what it promised. Only by clearing away the bureaucratic and legal obstacles binding the government’s hands can voters’ wishes be delivered — from reducing immigration and bogus asylum claims to improving economic growth and the performance of public services. This is the message Labour fears — but not the messenger. The words they used to describe him included “weird” and “extreme”. They also believe he reaches too quickly for old Thatcherite solutions to today’s problems. Jenrick has alighted on the systemic nature of Britain’s ills, but has yet to really embrace the new world to which Britain belongs — a world that requires more than reheated Thatcherism if Britain is to prosper. To those close to Starmer, Jenrick looks more like a second William Hague — or even Iain Duncan Smith — than a David Cameron, let alone a Margaret Thatcher.'
Miliband's headlong rush into breaking our energy cricket bats to replace them with some tofu and crackers is really going to create serious issues by the time of the next election. Even if everything pans out well, it is till going to end up in a expensive crunch of some type with rationing/dynamic pricing at peak times. That assumes he is going to actually achieve what he claims he's going to do.
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
The only way that Jenrick (or whoever the Tories elect) will be out in two years will be if they're so god-awful at PMQs that Starmer trounces them every single week, AND run such an inept CCHQ operation that it's worse than Sunak managed during the last General Election. Neither of those are especially plausible scenarios.
It is also a mistake to say the Tories will only win again with Cameron 2.
Indeed Starmer is more Brown or Ed Miliband 2 than Blair 2
True. Throwing valuable objects (particularly metal) into water is old, old magic. And the oldest Gods live in the water (particularly springs - hence, I suppose, the fountain connection.) Archaeological (is it archaeological if you dive rather than dig?) evidence shows that goes back to pre-Roman Britain at least. An echo of this can be found in the return of excalibur to the water.
It’s remarkable that we still have these deep, primitive, reflexive religious drives
Circumcision is just human sacrifice somewhat attenuated with bogus explanations. The Aztecs were much more honest: they used to pierce their penises with maguey thorns. Then offer the bloodied thorns to the Gods of Tenochtitlan
Scarification, body piercing, tattoos…?
I think religious drives are possibly hardwired (that is, the genetic descendents of those with religious drives outcompeted the genetic descendents of those without) but from a purely scientific point of view it seems unlikely that those specifcally with the urge to sacrifice things in water or pierce/tattoo themselves would actually do better than those who did not - unless, you know, that is actually what the Gods want, and they reward those who do? An easier explanation is that humans ARE hardwired to tradition, and to repeating what our parents and grandparents did, even if we don't know why - strikes me that those with a behavioural bias to tradition could have a genetic advantage in survival. But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Religion and similar belief systems are the primary lever that older men use to get younger men to put their lives (in this world) on the line to defend or enhance their power through aggression and conquest. As well as fostering co-operation and obedience more generally. In historical and pre-historical times, that carried considerable evolutionary advantage.
A little harsh. Kemi is easy on the eye, and both Hunt and Cleverly are above-averagely handsome middle aged men. Even Jenrick is no uglier than the averagr politician of 20 years ago. Unless... the fact that I am now of these people's generation means I have entirely different standards... which means to today's 20 somethings I probably look qualitatively no different to how my generation thought William Hague ot Tony Blair looked.
I was referring to their political offering rather than their looks.
@PippaCrerar Liz Truss says Tories would've done better at election if she'd stayed on as leader: "Yes, I do.”
She expands: "When I was in No 10, Reform was polling at 3%. By the time we got to the election, I think they got 18% because we promised change that we didn’t deliver."
There is a big chunk of money heading to PA, WI and MI for the Senate races. What is interesting is that the PAC involved had not spent on MI or WI but believe the gap in the Senate races in all 3 states is narrowing between the incumbents and the challengers.
As they say, follow the actions, not the words.
Re threats to Republican seats, they are not spending any cash yet in TX or FL (or NE) but say they are keeping one eye on TX and FL, and half an eye on NE - so they clearly think they cannot be complacent.
Separately, Ellie Slotkin has been caught worrying about Harris' chances in MI:
Oh do fuck off, Theresa. One of the worst prime ministers in history and a primary reason we are in a mess now - and you nearly lost to Corbyn. Get stuffed
Edit to add: that’s all aimed at Theresa May, @HYUFD! Not you!
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Do the Davos global elite include former Davos panellists who promise to fix the international trade system and happen to be called Liz Truss? Or the British-Swiss Parliamentary Ski team who stay all expenses paid at Davos and include Liz Truss? Well, included.
I am quite glad Liz has alighted on Davos/WEF as a criticisable nexus - firstly because they deserve it, secondly because it's better than 'the deep state', which I thought was a misfire and didn't translate to the UK.
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
The only way that Jenrick (or whoever the Tories elect) will be out in two years will be if they're so god-awful at PMQs that Starmer trounces them every single week, AND run such an inept CCHQ operation that it's worse than Sunak managed during the last General Election. Neither of those are especially plausible scenarios.
Of course. Most leaders get given a ‘go’ at fighting an election - IDS was the rare exception because his inadequacy was already so painfully obvious.
The replacement point for the incoming leader is therefore after the next GE defeat, with the chance of continuing any longer depending upon how convincing the first phase of the recovery proves to be.
The Tories not only need the government to fail badly, but also to erase the memory of their brand, ratnered by Johnson and his ilk, replacing it with some semblance of unity, purpose and competence. That’s going to take at least two terms; people will likely give this government a second chance unless the first term falls apart in a 1970s-style crisis. And even then, the Tories only get a shot if they put forward a credible, sensible alternative.
Oh do fuck off, Theresa. One of the worst prime ministers in history and a primary reason we are in a mess now - and you nearly lost to Corbyn. Get stuffed
Edit to add: that’s all aimed at Theresa May, @HYUFD! Not you!
Well it rather depends on what the centre ground is. I'd argue the centre ground of the electorate is what we might consider broadly right wing on culture and immigration, and broadly left wing on tax and spend. (Kind of where the SDP is.) Which is pretty much 180 degree opposite what the political classes consider 'centre ground'.
Badenoch told the BBC last night that she has had "maternity leave" three times.
Yet according to Guardian blog yesterday Ashcroft's memoire of her says when she was at Spectator and had second child she resigned rather than take maternity leave.
"She told me she thought it would be unfair to ask us to keep her job open while she was on maternity leave,” Fraser Nelson, the Spectator editor, is quoted in the book as saying."
She's really made a mess of this issue. Can she come back in time to make it to the final 2 ? I suspect Jenrick is the rights flag bearer for certain.
Badenoch had made a hash of this and is suffering. But then Jenrick's answer to the donation question was poor and he's gotten away with it..
I said to someone on here yesterday that the interview on Laura K's show was not really very probing at all.
He was hardly tested or probed. More friendly full tosses that vicious inswinging yorkers.
There are lots of questions to answer about this donation. Which hardly seems to make the news and he hardly seems to be pressed on.
Oh do fuck off, Theresa. One of the worst prime ministers in history and a primary reason we are in a mess now - and you nearly lost to Corbyn. Get stuffed
Edit to add: that’s all aimed at Theresa May, @HYUFD! Not you!
She didn't nearly lose. She got 317 seats, Jezza only got 262.
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
The only way that Jenrick (or whoever the Tories elect) will be out in two years will be if they're so god-awful at PMQs that Starmer trounces them every single week, AND run such an inept CCHQ operation that it's worse than Sunak managed during the last General Election. Neither of those are especially plausible scenarios.
Of course. Most leaders get given a ‘go’ at fighting an election - IDS was the rare exception because his inadequacy was already so painfully obvious.
The replacement point for the incoming leader is therefore after the next GE defeat, with the chance of continuing any longer depending upon how convincing the first phase of the recovery proves to be.
The Tories not only need the government to fail badly, but also to erase the memory of their brand, ratnered by Johnson and his ilk, replacing it with some semblance of unity, purpose and competence. That’s going to take at least two terms; people will likely give this government a second chance unless the first term falls apart in a 1970s-style crisis. And even then, the Tories only get a shot if they put forward a credible, sensible alternative.
And whilst it's rubbish for the career prospects of the Fab Four, the Conservatives probably need a substantial change of faces as well. It's not entirely fair, and probably not in the interests of good governance, but the UK electorate does now seem to have an unspoken "which bit of your last defeat didn't you understand" rule. Starmer (2015), Cameron (2001) and Blair (1983) each entered Parliament after their party had lost office.
Strange how these welfare payments have developed into sacred cows. First, winter fuel allowance, now matenrity pay, the slightest suggestion they are either unnecessary or in need of reform and a bucketload of ordure falls on the person making a suggestion.
Yet we are happy to continue running a deficit and borrowing at least £100 billion per year which we know is unsupportable. It will have to be substantial tax rises because there is clearly no public stomach for any spending cuts.
I don't think there's much stomach for tax rises either - which is why Britain is borrowing £bns per year.
This may only stop when the IMF is called in. Britain can continue to borrow right up to the line until something unexpected tips the country over the edge. And then it will require substantial tax rises and spending cuts.
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
The only way that Jenrick (or whoever the Tories elect) will be out in two years will be if they're so god-awful at PMQs that Starmer trounces them every single week, AND run such an inept CCHQ operation that it's worse than Sunak managed during the last General Election. Neither of those are especially plausible scenarios.
Of course. Most leaders get given a ‘go’ at fighting an election - IDS was the rare exception because his inadequacy was already so painfully obvious.
The replacement point for the incoming leader is therefore after the next GE defeat, with the chance of continuing any longer depending upon how convincing the first phase of the recovery proves to be.
The Tories not only need the government to fail badly, but also to erase the memory of their brand, ratnered by Johnson and his ilk, replacing it with some semblance of unity, purpose and competence. That’s going to take at least two terms; people will likely give this government a second chance unless the first term falls apart in a 1970s-style crisis. And even then, the Tories only get a shot if they put forward a credible, sensible alternative.
And whilst it's rubbish for the career prospects of the Fab Four, the Conservatives probably need a substantial change of faces as well. It's not entirely fair, and probably not in the interests of good governance, but the UK electorate does now seem to have an unspoken "which bit of your last defeat didn't you understand" rule. Starmer (2015), Cameron (2001) and Blair (1983) each entered Parliament after their party had lost office.
Have Labour learnt any lessons from their defeat in 2010?
There is a big chunk of money heading to PA, WI and MI for the Senate races. What is interesting is that the PAC involved had not spent on MI or WI but believe the gap in the Senate races in all 3 states is narrowing between the incumbents and the challengers.
As they say, follow the actions, not the words.
Re threats to Republican seats, they are not spending any cash yet in TX or FL (or NE) but say they are keeping one eye on TX and FL, and half an eye on NE - so they clearly think they cannot be complacent.
Separately, Ellie Slotkin has been caught worrying about Harris' chances in MI:
Also, she kicked GOP ass in a congressional district Trump won by seven points. And had his number back then. .. “Something has been off about that relationship since the beginning,” she wrote, “and Americans are quite literally paying in blood for his pandering to Putin.”..
When was an election last won from outside the centre ground? Can’t think of one yet. Arguably Kinnock was more centrist than Thatcher in 87, but that’s about it.
Doesn’t mean that elections cannot be won from the extremes, but it hasn’t yet
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Do the Davos global elite include former Davos panellists who promise to fix the international trade system and happen to be called Liz Truss? Or the British-Swiss Parliamentary Ski team who stay all expenses paid at Davos and include Liz Truss? Well, included.
I am quite glad Liz has alighted on Davos/WEF as a criticisable nexus - firstly because they deserve it, secondly because it's better than 'the deep state', which I thought was a misfire and didn't translate to the UK.
Badenoch told the BBC last night that she has had "maternity leave" three times.
Yet according to Guardian blog yesterday Ashcroft's memoire of her says when she was at Spectator and had second child she resigned rather than take maternity leave.
"She told me she thought it would be unfair to ask us to keep her job open while she was on maternity leave,” Fraser Nelson, the Spectator editor, is quoted in the book as saying."
She's really made a mess of this issue. Can she come back in time to make it to the final 2 ? I suspect Jenrick is the rights flag bearer for certain.
Badenoch had made a hash of this and is suffering. But then Jenrick's answer to the donation question was poor and he's gotten away with it..
I said to someone on here yesterday that the interview on Laura K's show was not really very probing at all.
He was hardly tested or probed. More friendly full tosses that vicious inswinging yorkers.
There are lots of questions to answer about this donation. Which hardly seems to make the news and he hardly seems to be pressed on.
Laura K gives soft interview to leading Tory shock!!!
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
The only way that Jenrick (or whoever the Tories elect) will be out in two years will be if they're so god-awful at PMQs that Starmer trounces them every single week, AND run such an inept CCHQ operation that it's worse than Sunak managed during the last General Election. Neither of those are especially plausible scenarios.
Of course. Most leaders get given a ‘go’ at fighting an election - IDS was the rare exception because his inadequacy was already so painfully obvious.
The replacement point for the incoming leader is therefore after the next GE defeat, with the chance of continuing any longer depending upon how convincing the first phase of the recovery proves to be.
The Tories not only need the government to fail badly, but also to erase the memory of their brand, ratnered by Johnson and his ilk, replacing it with some semblance of unity, purpose and competence. That’s going to take at least two terms; people will likely give this government a second chance unless the first term falls apart in a 1970s-style crisis. And even then, the Tories only get a shot if they put forward a credible, sensible alternative.
And whilst it's rubbish for the career prospects of the Fab Four, the Conservatives probably need a substantial change of faces as well. It's not entirely fair, and probably not in the interests of good governance, but the UK electorate does now seem to have an unspoken "which bit of your last defeat didn't you understand" rule. Starmer (2015), Cameron (2001) and Blair (1983) each entered Parliament after their party had lost office.
Have Labour learnt any lessons from their defeat in 2010?
You'd have to ask them that. It may be that the lesson they learned is "it's much easier to win an election against a knackered old government that's hung around too long than it is to win an election when you are a knackered old government that's hung around too long." Which is probably good practical politics, but not the lesson you are seeking.
But I'm not talking about policy so much as the faces. The bit of politics that is about humans more than dessicated policy calculators. Even if the new Conservative leader comes up with a brilliant set of shiny new policies, I suspect a lot of voters will still say "oh no, not you again."
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Do the Davos global elite include former Davos panellists who promise to fix the international trade system and happen to be called Liz Truss? Or the British-Swiss Parliamentary Ski team who stay all expenses paid at Davos and include Liz Truss? Well, included.
I am quite glad Liz has alighted on Davos/WEF as a criticisable nexus - firstly because they deserve it, secondly because it's better than 'the deep state', which I thought was a misfire and didn't translate to the UK.
But its her and her mates!
Ed Conway is pointing out that Liz's new crush, Trump, is the only sitting president is a very long time to actually go to Davos. Twice.
@TimesRadio “I’ve applied for a few jobs and sadly not even had an interview yet.”
@GullisJonathan admits he’s struggling to return to teaching after losing his seat as a Conservative MP because there are "too many activists in the classroom"
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
The only way that Jenrick (or whoever the Tories elect) will be out in two years will be if they're so god-awful at PMQs that Starmer trounces them every single week, AND run such an inept CCHQ operation that it's worse than Sunak managed during the last General Election. Neither of those are especially plausible scenarios.
Of course. Most leaders get given a ‘go’ at fighting an election - IDS was the rare exception because his inadequacy was already so painfully obvious.
The replacement point for the incoming leader is therefore after the next GE defeat, with the chance of continuing any longer depending upon how convincing the first phase of the recovery proves to be.
The Tories not only need the government to fail badly, but also to erase the memory of their brand, ratnered by Johnson and his ilk, replacing it with some semblance of unity, purpose and competence. That’s going to take at least two terms; people will likely give this government a second chance unless the first term falls apart in a 1970s-style crisis. And even then, the Tories only get a shot if they put forward a credible, sensible alternative.
I think you misunderstand what Gerald Ratner did. He made a public, video-recorded speech slating his own products. This was widely publicised and killed his company. Boris Johnson did not do that; in-fact the leader who has come closest to 'Ratnering' the Tory brand is Theresa May, with her 'Nasty Party' tag, which has indeed been damaging and hard to shake.
If the next leader just does 'OK', if they encourage more Tories out to vote, if they manage to get Reform to lay off in some target seats, if they score some points against Starmer (not a difficult task let's be honest) then they are going to gain 50+ seats without breaking a sweat, because of the fragile nature of Starmer’s majority.
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept 2,050 UK adults
Do the Davos global elite include former Davos panellists who promise to fix the international trade system and happen to be called Liz Truss? Or the British-Swiss Parliamentary Ski team who stay all expenses paid at Davos and include Liz Truss? Well, included.
I am quite glad Liz has alighted on Davos/WEF as a criticisable nexus - firstly because they deserve it, secondly because it's better than 'the deep state', which I thought was a misfire and didn't translate to the UK.
But its her and her mates!
Ed Conway is pointing out that Liz's new crush, Trump, is the only sitting president is a very long time to actually go to Davos. Twice.
It clearly resonates with a chunk of the populist right, just as son of the Times editor, posh boy pin up millionaire banker JRM complaining about the elite did, but it is completely baffling when it is in plain sight that they are the same people they are bitching about.
I think you misunderstand what Gerald Ratner did. He made a public, video-recorded speech slating his own products. This was widely publicised and killed his company. Boris Johnson did not do that; in-fact the leader who has come closest to 'Ratnering' the Tory brand is Theresa May, with her 'Nasty Party' tag, which has indeed been damaging and hard to shake.
BoZo made very public announcements telling everybody to not meet up, not celebrate, and certainly not party
Oh do fuck off, Theresa. One of the worst prime ministers in history and a primary reason we are in a mess now - and you nearly lost to Corbyn. Get stuffed
Edit to add: that’s all aimed at Theresa May, @HYUFD! Not you!
Well it rather depends on what the centre ground is. I'd argue the centre ground of the electorate is what we might consider broadly right wing on culture and immigration, and broadly left wing on tax and spend. (Kind of where the SDP is.) Which is pretty much 180 degree opposite what the political classes consider 'centre ground'.
I don’t know that polling evidence supports that contention.
There is a big chunk of money heading to PA, WI and MI for the Senate races. What is interesting is that the PAC involved had not spent on MI or WI but believe the gap in the Senate races in all 3 states is narrowing between the incumbents and the challengers.
As they say, follow the actions, not the words.
Re threats to Republican seats, they are not spending any cash yet in TX or FL (or NE) but say they are keeping one eye on TX and FL, and half an eye on NE - so they clearly think they cannot be complacent.
Separately, Ellie Slotkin has been caught worrying about Harris' chances in MI:
Also, she kicked GOP ass in a congressional district Trump won by seven points. And had his number back then. .. “Something has been off about that relationship since the beginning,” she wrote, “and Americans are quite literally paying in blood for his pandering to Putin.”..
She was also a lot smarter than many people who were claiming the polls in 2020 were showing Biden cruising to victory:
" I don’t for one minute think this [presidential] race is safe in anyone’s column. I’ve been literally begging people to ignore those polls."
Also note - her latest comments were not said in an interview but in a conversation with Cory Booker and they were leaked. A slight difference in terms of the audience targeting.
Thanks for pointing out though that her friends call her Lissa.
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Inevitable consequence of Brexit
What's the link between this new government and Brexit?
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Nah. we're a wonderful country.
True, there are problems, and some things could be better - when has that not been the case? - but we're still a great place to live. People are generally kind, society generally muddles along, and things generally work.
“To be fair to Sue Gray, she really is an impartial civil servant. She brought down one prime minister, who was a Conservative. And now she’s bringing down another one, who happens to be Labour”
Jeez pass me the sick bag . He really is a moron .
They'll elected Jenrick this month and he'll be out in two years.
I guess they have to go through this stage before neo-Cameron arrives in early 2030s to lead them back to the centre ground and to office.
Maybe it will be the actual Cameron?
The only way that Jenrick (or whoever the Tories elect) will be out in two years will be if they're so god-awful at PMQs that Starmer trounces them every single week, AND run such an inept CCHQ operation that it's worse than Sunak managed during the last General Election. Neither of those are especially plausible scenarios.
Of course. Most leaders get given a ‘go’ at fighting an election - IDS was the rare exception because his inadequacy was already so painfully obvious.
The replacement point for the incoming leader is therefore after the next GE defeat, with the chance of continuing any longer depending upon how convincing the first phase of the recovery proves to be.
The Tories not only need the government to fail badly, but also to erase the memory of their brand, ratnered by Johnson and his ilk, replacing it with some semblance of unity, purpose and competence. That’s going to take at least two terms; people will likely give this government a second chance unless the first term falls apart in a 1970s-style crisis. And even then, the Tories only get a shot if they put forward a credible, sensible alternative.
And whilst it's rubbish for the career prospects of the Fab Four, the Conservatives probably need a substantial change of faces as well. It's not entirely fair, and probably not in the interests of good governance, but the UK electorate does now seem to have an unspoken "which bit of your last defeat didn't you understand" rule. Starmer (2015), Cameron (2001) and Blair (1983) each entered Parliament after their party had lost office.
Have Labour learnt any lessons from their defeat in 2010?
You'd have to ask them that. It may be that the lesson they learned is "it's much easier to win an election against a knackered old government that's hung around too long than it is to win an election when you are a knackered old government that's hung around too long." Which is probably good practical politics, but not the lesson you are seeking.
But I'm not talking about policy so much as the faces. The bit of politics that is about humans more than dessicated policy calculators. Even if the new Conservative leader comes up with a brilliant set of shiny new policies, I suspect a lot of voters will still say "oh no, not you again."
None of this matters if Labour run the economy even further into the ground. And they really might. They have zero ideas, they are flailing already, and cratering in the polls after just 3 months
If this continues then they will end up hated even more - perhaps far more - than the Tories of 2024 and voters will use any means possible to punish them
@PippaCrerar Liz Truss says Tories would've done better at election if she'd stayed on as leader: "Yes, I do.”
She expands: "When I was in No 10, Reform was polling at 3%. By the time we got to the election, I think they got 18% because we promised change that we didn’t deliver."
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Nah. we're a wonderful country.
True, there are problems, and some things could be better - when has that not been the case? - but we're still a great place to live. People are generally kind, society generally muddles along, and things generally work.
Do you ever travel? I’m not sure you do
You only need to get out there in the world to realise, sadly, very sadly, that Britain is no longer a “great place to live” - not relatively, not any more
Many many countries now offer a notably higher quality of life
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Argentina in the 1950s, just a steady slow decline because the state is unwilling to face up to cutting welfare and entitlements.
I think you misunderstand what Gerald Ratner did. He made a public, video-recorded speech slating his own products. This was widely publicised and killed his company. Boris Johnson did not do that; in-fact the leader who has come closest to 'Ratnering' the Tory brand is Theresa May, with her 'Nasty Party' tag, which has indeed been damaging and hard to shake.
BoZo made very public announcements telling everybody to not meet up, not celebrate, and certainly not party
While his staff did all three
Which still has nothing to do with what Ratner did.
I think you misunderstand what Gerald Ratner did. He made a public, video-recorded speech slating his own products. This was widely publicised and killed his company. Boris Johnson did not do that; in-fact the leader who has come closest to 'Ratnering' the Tory brand is Theresa May, with her 'Nasty Party' tag, which has indeed been damaging and hard to shake.
BoZo made very public announcements telling everybody to not meet up, not celebrate, and certainly not party
While his staff did all three
Which still has nothing to do with what Ratner did.
BoZo, and Ratner, both told the public "I am selling you crap"
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Argentina in the 1950s, just a steady slow decline because the state is unwilling to face up to cutting welfare and entitlements.
It’s so bad I think it could be worse than Argentina
I pray I’m wrong and this is one of my passing moments of hyper-gloom, but it feels like Britain is hurtling towards something awful and this dreadful government is actively pressing the accelerator even more than the last dreadful government
I think you misunderstand what Gerald Ratner did. He made a public, video-recorded speech slating his own products. This was widely publicised and killed his company. Boris Johnson did not do that; in-fact the leader who has come closest to 'Ratnering' the Tory brand is Theresa May, with her 'Nasty Party' tag, which has indeed been damaging and hard to shake.
BoZo made very public announcements telling everybody to not meet up, not celebrate, and certainly not party
While his staff did all three
Which still has nothing to do with what Ratner did.
BoZo, and Ratner, both told the public "I am selling you crap"
Surely if anyone was guilty of that in recent British political history it was David Cameron in the referendum campaign.
“To be fair to Sue Gray, she really is an impartial civil servant. She brought down one prime minister, who was a Conservative. And now she’s bringing down another one, who happens to be Labour”
It's a good gag, but a) it's not really true (Boris was weakened by Partygate, sure, but he was brought down by lying about Pincher the Pincher) and b) it's a dangerous thing for any Conservative to talk about...
"so Tom, if Boris was so badly treated, would you welcome him back as a Conservative candidate?"
I think you misunderstand what Gerald Ratner did. He made a public, video-recorded speech slating his own products. This was widely publicised and killed his company. Boris Johnson did not do that; in-fact the leader who has come closest to 'Ratnering' the Tory brand is Theresa May, with her 'Nasty Party' tag, which has indeed been damaging and hard to shake.
BoZo made very public announcements telling everybody to not meet up, not celebrate, and certainly not party
While his staff did all three
Which still has nothing to do with what Ratner did.
BoZo, and Ratner, both told the public "I am selling you crap"
Boris may have been crap, and people may have rumbled him as crap, but he still did not 'Ratner' the Tory brand in the way that GR (to Ratner's) and arguably TMay did. You can call what he did do to it more damaging or less damaging, but it isn't the same.
@TimesRadio “I’ve applied for a few jobs and sadly not even had an interview yet.”
@GullisJonathan admits he’s struggling to return to teaching after losing his seat as a Conservative MP because there are "too many activists in the classroom"
I think you misunderstand what Gerald Ratner did. He made a public, video-recorded speech slating his own products. This was widely publicised and killed his company. Boris Johnson did not do that; in-fact the leader who has come closest to 'Ratnering' the Tory brand is Theresa May, with her 'Nasty Party' tag, which has indeed been damaging and hard to shake.
BoZo made very public announcements telling everybody to not meet up, not celebrate, and certainly not party
While his staff did all three
Which still has nothing to do with what Ratner did.
BoZo, and Ratner, both told the public "I am selling you crap"
Boris may have been crap, and people may have rumbled him as crap, but he still did not 'Ratner' the Tory brand in the way that GR (to Ratner's) and arguably TMay did. You can call what he did do to it more damaging or less damaging, but it isn't the same.
People stopped buying it as a result of his actions.
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Nah. we're a wonderful country.
True, there are problems, and some things could be better - when has that not been the case? - but we're still a great place to live. People are generally kind, society generally muddles along, and things generally work.
Do you ever travel? I’m not sure you do
You only need to get out there in the world to realise, sadly, very sadly, that Britain is no longer a “great place to live” - not relatively, not any more
Many many countries now offer a notably higher quality of life
For the well-off, perhaps. The sorts of wankers who go to the hotels you waste around in
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Argentina in the 1950s, just a steady slow decline because the state is unwilling to face up to cutting welfare and entitlements.
It’s so bad I think it could be worse than Argentina
I pray I’m wrong and this is one of my passing moments of hyper-gloom, but it feels like Britain is hurtling towards something awful and this dreadful government is actively pressing the accelerator even more than the last dreadful government
I don't think it's going to be as bad as Argentina, but we're on that path right now. One of my worries is that there will be a general overlooking of how bad everything is in 2028/29 because the international bodies will line up to help Labour out just before an election.
It comes as little surprise to me that the OECD gave the UK the biggest growth upgrade just after the election of a Labour government while during the many years the Tories were in charge it was generally very negative, even when the UK was outgrowing other similarly developed European countries.
The IMF will be the key in all of this and I think the next Tory leader needs to make nice with them and start courting the IMF from day one so it becomes hostile towards the government plans and is ready with the hundred billions that will be needed to bail the nation out when it all comes crashing down.
“To be fair to Sue Gray, she really is an impartial civil servant. She brought down one prime minister, who was a Conservative. And now she’s bringing down another one, who happens to be Labour”
It's a good gag, but a) it's not really true (Boris was weakened by Partygate, sure, but he was brought down by lying about Pincher the Pincher) and b) it's a dangerous thing for any Conservative to talk about...
"so Tom, if Boris was so badly treated, would you welcome him back as a Conservative candidate?"
That's an easy question to answer - "Yes, of course I would welcome Boris back into the party if he wanted to stand" because Boris isn't coming back.
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Nah. we're a wonderful country.
True, there are problems, and some things could be better - when has that not been the case? - but we're still a great place to live. People are generally kind, society generally muddles along, and things generally work.
Do you ever travel? I’m not sure you do
You only need to get out there in the world to realise, sadly, very sadly, that Britain is no longer a “great place to live” - not relatively, not any more
Many many countries now offer a notably higher quality of life
Not to say you are wrong on this but I would argue that what you do - fly in, stay in posh places, have great experiences etc is not a good way to work out if a place has a notably higher quality of life than the UK. You generally find out far more if you live somewhere, use its healthcare, pays its taxes etc.
There is nothing left for Britain. No spark, no energy, no ideas, nothing. We are a hollowed out version of Egypt - filthy, overpopulated and stagnant - but without the sunshine
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
Nah. we're a wonderful country.
True, there are problems, and some things could be better - when has that not been the case? - but we're still a great place to live. People are generally kind, society generally muddles along, and things generally work.
Do you ever travel? I’m not sure you do
You only need to get out there in the world to realise, sadly, very sadly, that Britain is no longer a “great place to live” - not relatively, not any more
Many many countries now offer a notably higher quality of life
It is probably more that when people travel they have better things to do than obsess about the local news.
Comments
I do wonder if the eventual outcome of all this is a default or devaluation - the markets won't like it very much, but if we're running a primary surplus that may not matter as much as people think. More of an issue would be what would happen to our banking/pensions sector, which we've regulated in such a way as to force them to hold lots of gilts.
But just putting forward a possible explanation doesn't make it any less remarkable. It's still remarkable that so apparently useless a tradition HAS survived for so long.
Fascinating Wiki article on this theme. Votive offerings. Seems to be near-universal across human civilisation
But some were keener than others
“In Europe, votive deposits are known from as early as the Neolithic, with polished axe hoards, reaching a peak in the late Bronze Age. High status artifacts such as armor and weaponry (mostly shields, swords, spears and arrows), fertility and cult symbols, coins, various treasures and animal statuettes (often dogs, oxen and in later periods horses) were common offerings in antiquity.
The votive offerings were sacrificed and buried or more commonly cast into bodies of water or peat bogs, whence they could not possibly have been recovered. In certain cases entire ships have been sacrificed, as in the Danish bog Nydam Mose. Often all the objects in a ritual hoard are broken, possibly 'killing' the objects to put them even further beyond utilitarian use before deposition. The purposeful discarding of valuable items such as swords and spearheads is thought to have had ritual overtones. The items have since been discovered in rivers, lakes and present or former wetlands by construction workers, peat diggers, metal-detectorists, members of the public and archaeologists.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Votive_offering
“Look, Brian’s dead. That’s a shame”
“Yes. What shall we do with his massive ship?”
“I know, let’s sacrifice it!”
“Yes, we can throw it in a bog! Genius!”
You have to tell us something that would cheer us up ?
Truss : Donald Trump might win. And yes that would really cheer me up. Trump winning in America would be a sign the tide is turning. The Davos global elite do not like Donald Trump and I take that as a good sign.
@Savanta_UK
Ahead of Liz Truss' only appearance at #CPC24 today, our latest political tracker shows she continues to be the most unpopular (-45) politician in the country.
Truss is also the least liked (-26) Conservative politician among 2024 Conservative voters.
20-22 Sept
2,050 UK adults
But even then....
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that tattoos, piercings are religious. You are harming yourself permanently, and the exercise is painful
Why on earth would you do that? It must be religious, you are propitiating the gods, even if you don’t realise it
The Moche of Peru used to cut off their own noses and lips to honour their not-at-all-freaky Tarantula God, that’s just one step further from a piercing
Some Moche ceramics I saw in Lima. It was once thought these statuettes were imaginative, now we know the Moche really did this:
I do not like x
x does not like y
therefore I like y.
There is some evidence the Moche were SO freaky even the other sacrifice-our-children MesoAmerican cultures thought they were a bit “off”
Northern Peru is barely trowelled by archaeologists. So much is left to dig up they are barely scraping the surface
When I was there researching this mad Moche civilisation I learned of one German dig that was, apparently, finding interesting stuff. So I got the location and found a map (pre Google maps) and set off but every road was either impassable or the police stopped me (dangerous terrorists etc)
Eventually I parked the car in a huff and set off across the semi desert on foot but it was pointless. I had no chance of finding it. Scared of getting lost or shot I scrunched back to the car and then I realised I really was SCRUNCHING - I was standing in the middle of a melted Moche adobe pyramid (this is not surprising there are 100s of them)
And the scrunching noise was me breaking bits of pottery inscribed with the iconography of the Tarantula God. I still have several of these shards, in my flat, to this day
Peru gives great Noom
Islamic suicide bombings are an extreme, modern day example of what a strict belief system can get people to do.
Look at the Vikings. Valhalla was essentially their seventy virgins.
Those close to Starmer believe that Robert Jenrick has come closest to having the kind of political analysis that could be most problematic for Labour. The 14 years of Tory government were very bad, Jenrick states, because the government showed itself incapable of delivering the systemic reforms that would allow it to deliver what it promised. Only by clearing away the bureaucratic and legal obstacles binding the government’s hands can voters’ wishes be delivered — from reducing immigration and bogus asylum claims to improving economic growth and the performance of public services. This is the message Labour fears — but not the messenger. The words they used to describe him included “weird” and “extreme”. They also believe he reaches too quickly for old Thatcherite solutions to today’s problems. Jenrick has alighted on the systemic nature of Britain’s ills, but has yet to really embrace the new world to which Britain belongs — a world that requires more than reheated Thatcherism if Britain is to prosper. To those close to Starmer, Jenrick looks more like a second William Hague — or even Iain Duncan Smith — than a David Cameron, let alone a Margaret Thatcher.'
https://unherd.com/2024/09/the-tory-contender-labour-fears/?tl_inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3&utm_source=UnHerd+Today&utm_campaign=ce0ce17957-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_09_30_08_49&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_79fd0df946-ce0ce17957-[LIST_EMAIL_ID]
"Well", said the Cashier, when Tiger Woods was caught out like that he putted a ball all the way across the hall of the bank into a cup to prove who he was. And when Andre Agassi was similarly caught he manged to lob a ball into the same cup with his racket. What can you do Mr Ten Hag?"
"I haven't got a clue," he says, "my mind is completely blank".
Cashier: "Will that be large notes or small notes Mr Ten Hag?
Forza Italia is already working with Lega and Brothers of Italy in the current Italian Meloni led government, the PP in Spain is working with Vox, the Swedish Moderates are governing with the backing of the Sweden Democrats and the Dutch VVD are now in government with the PVV. So in many western European countries centre right parties are now willing to work with the nationalist populist hard right. Even if in Germany, France, Austria and for the moment the UK they are not.
Though if Trump wins Starmer will clearly just follow what he decides in any peace terms, he and Lammy clearly have less interest in supporting Zelensky to total victory than Truss, Boris, Healey and Shapps and Wallace did.
Indeed they are more likely to take on Trump on his support for Netanyahu than his willingness to negotiate with Putin. If Harris wins again they would just follow what the US decides though I can't see Harris allowing missile attacks in Russia itself either anymore than Biden has even if she provides Zelensky with more arms than Putin. Zelensky's best bet in the US election would have been a Haley win but that is now long gone.
As Haley remarked '"This is bigger than Ukraine," Haley said. "This is a war about freedom, and it's one we have to win." Haley called Russian President Vladimir Putin a tyrant and refuted claims the conflict is purely a territorial dispute -- comments targeted at Trump's close relationship with Putin and DeSantis's initial comments about the war. '
https://www.rferl.org/a/us-nikki-haley-ukraine-support-2024-election/32445633.html
Indeed Starmer is more Brown or Ed Miliband 2 than Blair 2
https://x.com/theresa_may/status/1839937445644624178
Liz Truss says Tories would've done better at election if she'd stayed on as leader: "Yes, I do.”
She expands: "When I was in No 10, Reform was polling at 3%. By the time we got to the election, I think they got 18% because we promised change that we didn’t deliver."
(NB: Nigel Farage wasn't leader when she was PM)
https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/republicans-deploy-cash-to-crack-democrats-blue-wall-in-senate-b8a3dd6f?st=SK8Roc&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
There is a big chunk of money heading to PA, WI and MI for the Senate races. What is interesting is that the PAC involved had not spent on MI or WI but believe the gap in the Senate races in all 3 states is narrowing between the incumbents and the challengers.
As they say, follow the actions, not the words.
Re threats to Republican seats, they are not spending any cash yet in TX or FL (or NE) but say they are keeping one eye on TX and FL, and half an eye on NE - so they clearly think they cannot be complacent.
Separately, Ellie Slotkin has been caught worrying about Harris' chances in MI:
https://www.axios.com/2024/09/29/michigan-senate-race-slotkin-harris
Edit to add: that’s all aimed at Theresa May, @HYUFD! Not you!
The replacement point for the incoming leader is therefore after the next GE defeat, with the chance of continuing any longer depending upon how convincing the first phase of the recovery proves to be.
The Tories not only need the government to fail badly, but also to erase the memory of their brand, ratnered by Johnson and his ilk, replacing it with some semblance of unity, purpose and competence. That’s going to take at least two terms; people will likely give this government a second chance unless the first term falls apart in a 1970s-style crisis. And even then, the Tories only get a shot if they put forward a credible, sensible alternative.
He was hardly tested or probed. More friendly full tosses that vicious inswinging yorkers.
There are lots of questions to answer about this donation. Which hardly seems to make the news and he hardly seems to be pressed on.
This may only stop when the IMF is called in. Britain can continue to borrow right up to the line until something unexpected tips the country over the edge. And then it will require substantial tax rises and spending cuts.
And 'caught' is hardly the word. She has form.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/07/10/elissa-slotkin-congress-trump-351513
Also, she kicked GOP ass in a congressional district Trump won by seven points.
And had his number back then.
.. “Something has been off about that relationship since the beginning,” she wrote, “and Americans are quite literally paying in blood for his pandering to Putin.”..
Doesn’t mean that elections cannot be won from the extremes, but it hasn’t yet
But I'm not talking about policy so much as the faces. The bit of politics that is about humans more than dessicated policy calculators. Even if the new Conservative leader comes up with a brilliant set of shiny new policies, I suspect a lot of voters will still say "oh no, not you again."
“I’ve applied for a few jobs and sadly not even had an interview yet.”
@GullisJonathan
admits he’s struggling to return to teaching after losing his seat as a Conservative MP because there are "too many activists in the classroom"
https://x.com/TimesRadio/status/1840698066212405644
If the next leader just does 'OK', if they encourage more Tories out to vote, if they manage to get Reform to lay off in some target seats, if they score some points against Starmer (not a difficult task let's be honest) then they are going to gain 50+ seats without breaking a sweat, because of the fragile nature of Starmer’s majority.
“Macron lures British nuclear start-up to Paris
Newcleo to relocate from London after accusing UK of expressing little interest”
We’ve just lost billions in investment because our politicians are cretins
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/30/macron-lures-british-nuclear-start-up-to-paris/
While his staff did all three
" I don’t for one minute think this [presidential] race is safe in anyone’s column. I’ve been literally begging people to ignore those polls."
Also note - her latest comments were not said in an interview but in a conversation with Cory Booker and they were leaked. A slight difference in terms of the audience targeting.
Thanks for pointing out though that her friends call her Lissa.
And we are governed by a cabal of mediocre halfwits who get excited by “free designer spectacles”
On the side of wealthy pensioners and posh parents.
True, there are problems, and some things could be better - when has that not been the case? - but we're still a great place to live. People are generally kind, society generally muddles along, and things generally work.
https://x.com/Josh_Self_/status/1840379298823184560
Tom Tugendhat on Sue Gray:
“To be fair to Sue Gray, she really is an impartial civil servant. She brought down one prime minister, who was a Conservative. And now she’s bringing down another one, who happens to be Labour”
If this continues then they will end up hated even more - perhaps far more - than the Tories of 2024 and voters will use any means possible to punish them
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election
You only need to get out there in the world to realise, sadly, very sadly, that Britain is no longer a “great place to live” - not relatively, not any more
Many many countries now offer a notably higher quality of life
I pray I’m wrong and this is one of my passing moments of hyper-gloom, but it feels like Britain is hurtling towards something awful and this dreadful government is actively pressing the accelerator even more than the last dreadful government
"so Tom, if Boris was so badly treated, would you welcome him back as a Conservative candidate?"
For the less well-off?
It comes as little surprise to me that the OECD gave the UK the biggest growth upgrade just after the election of a Labour government while during the many years the Tories were in charge it was generally very negative, even when the UK was outgrowing other similarly developed European countries.
The IMF will be the key in all of this and I think the next Tory leader needs to make nice with them and start courting the IMF from day one so it becomes hostile towards the government plans and is ready with the hundred billions that will be needed to bail the nation out when it all comes crashing down.