Votes for women were bound up with votes for working class males (40% of adult males were disenfranchised prior to 1918). Many suffragettes were opposed to working class enfranchisement, which hindered the campaign for female suffrage. It wasn't a straightforward left vs right dispute.
As far I am aware it was the suffragists, who were classist so to speak - not the suffragettes, who actually left the suffragists originally (and form the suffragettes) due to how classist they were against working class women.
Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst both advocated the banning of trade union.
I can't help there - but that reminds me of Susanna on here who claimed to have N kids, got her degree whilst living in Cardboard City, but couldn't remember how old her children were. Or the year she graduated IIRC.
They aged 4yrs between two threads and she was terribly inconsistent with other small details. She even misspelled her own name more than once.
Some years ago there was someone posting on the internet, mainly on the Telegraph site as it was then, as Rosie Trees, or something like that, who purported to be a young single mother of "n" children (the number varied) and who had a phenomenal knowledge of politics, economics (both theory and practice) and social policy in post-war Europe. The poster was eventually unmasked as a Labour activist/Spad.
Does anyone remember the case and can anyone supply the name of the culprit?
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
Then the Right can't really preach much about having been pro-equality all along if they think that. They also can't then wonder why many BMEs don't vote for them.
I'd like to think that there are BME voters who do value freedom of association, property rights, and free speech.
And of course, the corollary of your argument is that Labour shouldn't wonder why they're struggling among White, or male voters.
I don't think it's as simple as believing in free speech "more than" believing in equality. You can strongly believe in equality yet also believe you shouldn't ban people from making the opposite argument.
I can't help there - but that reminds me of Susanna on here who claimed to have N kids, got her degree whilst living in Cardboard City, but couldn't remember how old her children were. Or the year she graduated IIRC.
They aged 4yrs between two threads and she was terribly inconsistent with other small details. She even misspelled her own name more than once.
Some years ago there was someone posting on the internet, mainly on the Telegraph site as it was then, as Rosie Trees, or something like that, who purported to be a young single mother of "n" children (the number varied) and who had a phenomenal knowledge of politics, economics (both theory and practice) and social policy in post-war Europe. The poster was eventually unmasked as a Labour activist/Spad.
Does anyone remember the case and can anyone supply the name of the culprit?
We used to have a centarian Scottish Laird with a side business of pie manufacture too, and a Cheshire farmer...
Trolling, Astroturfing and Sock-puppetry are all part of the fun of the internet, and in the end it is the debate that matters rather than the person arguing it.
Mr. Foxinsox, excepting when people use their personal circumstances to back up their arguments. When that's the case, the sincerity of the individual has a bearing on the argument as well as the integrity of the individual making it.
Some years ago there was someone posting on the internet, mainly on the Telegraph site as it was then, as Rosie Trees, or something like that, who purported to be a young single mother of "n" children (the number varied) and who had a phenomenal knowledge of politics, economics (both theory and practice) and social policy in post-war Europe, always from a leftist perspective. The poster was eventually unmasked as a Labour activist/Spad.
Does anyone remember the case and can anyone supply the name of the culprit?</bDo not know but prompted me to ask what happened to Snowflake the advocate for Brownomics?
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
I would put it differently. Conservatives believe in equality - just not of outcome (which is pie in the sky wishful thinking) but of opportunity. That being the case, measurement and enforcement of equality centres on different things.
I don't think you get any one type of conservatives. There's also the difficulty that societies which have more equality of outcome have more equality of opportunity. This makes sense: if the richest people are twice as rich as the poorest people, it's easier for poor people to make up the gap than if the richest people are ten times richer.
I'm a conservative and while I wouldn't support complete equality of outcome, I would prefer we have more more equality of outcome than we currently do. I wouldn't support a society where only the top 10% can have comfortable middle class lives, even if there was a completely meritocratic race to getting there. In fact, I'd say that the desire to maintain the 20th Century's mass property-owning democracy is inherently a conservative desire.
And if they make up ridiculous arguments to back up their position based on their supposed circumstances, it's even funnier.
Ash's increasingly contorted positions on why the unemployed can't travel to a job intv because they spent their last £2.50 on toothpaste remains a classic.
He must have argued that position over dozens of posts with varying sidenotes on his personal poverty in Merthyr.
Mr. Foxinsox, excepting when people use their personal circumstances to back up their arguments. When that's the case, the sincerity of the individual has a bearing on the argument as well as the integrity of the individual making it.
@MikeK, As Britain would be better off out of the EU, surely the problems at Calais would be worse? After all, the better Britain looks compared to our continental brethren, the more the illegal immigrants will head for our shores, rather than hanging about in France
We would be thus bound by European human rights law in how we dealt with asylum claims, however. For example, we could enforce a policy of immediately deporting anyone who could clearly be shown to have come from a safe country.
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
Then the Right can't really preach much about having been pro-equality all along if they think that. They also can't then wonder why many BMEs don't vote for them.
I'd like to think that there are BME voters who do value freedom of association, property rights, and free speech.
And of course, the corollary of your argument is that Labour shouldn't wonder why they're struggling among White, or male voters.
Most BMEs do, but they see it them as equally important as equality not above it.
Labour are struggling among those demographics largely because of the immigration issue. The Tories are also struggling among women under 45.
Mr. Foxinsox, excepting when people use their personal circumstances to back up their arguments. When that's the case, the sincerity of the individual has a bearing on the argument as well as the integrity of the individual making it.
Exactly. The "Cheshire farmer" in real life used his own name, that of his girlfriend and their child in party political press releases - which made his online lies here all the more odd and evidence of his deep mental instability.
Quite why Dr Sox chose to lump that unpleasant individual in the same sentence as JackW's obvious and open use of a humorous affectation to overlay his true identity is anyone's guess.
Still, no-one could possibly impugn the important genetic research on land-walking superfish I conduct in the subterranean laboratory beneath Castle Morris Dancer.
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
Then the Right can't really preach much about having been pro-equality all along if they think that. They also can't then wonder why many BMEs don't vote for them.
I'd like to think that there are BME voters who do value freedom of association, property rights, and free speech.
And of course, the corollary of your argument is that Labour shouldn't wonder why they're struggling among White, or male voters.
Most BMEs do, but they see it them as equally important as equality not above it.
Labour are struggling among those demographics largely because of the immigration issue. The Tories are also struggling among women under 45.
That's a bold statement. Is there polling evidence for this? Or has someone appointed you spokeman for all of 'em?
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
I would put it differently. Conservatives believe in equality - just not of outcome (which is pie in the sky wishful thinking) but of opportunity. That being the case, measurement and enforcement of equality centres on different things.
I don't think you get any one type of conservatives. There's also the difficulty that societies which have more equality of outcome have more equality of opportunity. This makes sense: if the richest people are twice as rich as the poorest people, it's easier for poor people to make up the gap than if the richest people are ten times richer.
I'm a conservative and while I wouldn't support complete equality of outcome, I would prefer we have more more equality of outcome than we currently do. I wouldn't support a society where only the top 10% can have comfortable middle class lives, even if there was a completely meritocratic race to getting there. In fact, I'd say that the desire to maintain the 20th Century's mass property-owning democracy is inherently a conservative desire.
I agree, the decline in property ownership, plus static real wages for the past 10 years pose a threat to conservatism in the long-term. The Right should want everyone to be able to aspire to a good standard of living.
One form of equality can work against another. Mass immigration, for example, redistributes wealth from labour to capital, by placing downward pressure on wages, and upward pressure on property prices.
Sort-of plug: the finalists in the Self-Published Fantasy Blog-off (#SPFBO on Twitter) will be announced this month.
I've reached what might be called round 1b, as the blogger reading my offering has axed 18 entries off the bat but put 9 (including Journey to Altmortis) onto a shortlist for the final. (There are 10 bloggers, each picks just 1 book to reach a final 10).
Still odds against, but nice to clear the first (half-) hurdle.
Anyway, as well as suggesting you give Journey to Altmortis a look, I'd recommend keeping at least a lazy eye on the contest. You might well find a self-published gem that you would otherwise have missed.
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
Then the Right can't really preach much about having been pro-equality all along if they think that. They also can't then wonder why many BMEs don't vote for them.
I'd like to think that there are BME voters who do value freedom of association, property rights, and free speech.
And of course, the corollary of your argument is that Labour shouldn't wonder why they're struggling among White, or male voters.
Most BMEs do, but they see it them as equally important as equality not above it.
Labour are struggling among those demographics largely because of the immigration issue. The Tories are also struggling among women under 45.
That's a bold statement. Is there polling evidence for this? Or has someone appointed you spokeman for all of 'em?
Polling evidence: Labour getting most of BMEs votes.
I don't think you get any one type of conservatives. There's also the difficulty that societies which have more equality of outcome have more equality of opportunity. This makes sense: if the richest people are twice as rich as the poorest people, it's easier for poor people to make up the gap than if the richest people are ten times richer.
I'm a conservative and while I wouldn't support complete equality of outcome, I would prefer we have more more equality of outcome than we currently do. I wouldn't support a society where only the top 10% can have comfortable middle class lives, even if there was a completely meritocratic race to getting there. In fact, I'd say that the desire to maintain the 20th Century's mass property-owning democracy is inherently a conservative desire.
It's hard to imagine a modern society and economy that has genuine equality of opportunity where only 10% make it to comfortable middle class. Even Latin America at its worst wasn't that bad. The need for knowledge professionals in a modern economy will always ensure a large middle class at least.
And to measure equality of the masses against the extraordinary wealth of a fraction of the one per cent is, in my view, pointless. There are heights of income achieved by some that no-one realistically can aspire to. If they achieve it, serendipity undoubtedly played as much a role as preparation and application. And no government should be trying to legislate away luck.
I cede you point that equality of outcome and equality of opportunity are not entirely independent. But they are far from perfectly correlated either. I accept that some form of redistributive taxation is necessary (between rich and poor and between wealthy and poorer regions within the state). But legislating equality of outcome (save equal pay for equal work) strikes me as have only potential negative effects. And yes, I include quotas in that.
Still, no-one could possibly impugn the important genetic research on land-walking superfish I conduct in the subterranean laboratory beneath Castle Morris Dancer.
Nobody would dare. I believe that you currently have at your disposal several highly efficient methods of execution which all act as an effective deterrent to such individuals!
Still, no-one could possibly impugn the important genetic research on land-walking superfish I conduct in the subterranean laboratory beneath Castle Morris Dancer.
Or your technical abilities with space cannon and trebuchet. The wiffle sticks are somewhat less credible though...
Votes for women were bound up with votes for working class males (40% of adult males were disenfranchised prior to 1918). Many suffragettes were opposed to working class enfranchisement, which hindered the campaign for female suffrage. It wasn't a straightforward left vs right dispute.
As far I am aware it was the suffragists, who were classist so to speak - not the suffragettes, who actually left the suffragists originally (and form the suffragettes) due to how classist they were against working class women.
Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst both advocated the banning of trade union.
True, I think that was post 1918 - intially, they had quite socialist beliefs. Sylvia I think continued with this.
Sort-of plug: the finalists in the Self-Published Fantasy Blog-off (#SPFBO on Twitter) will be announced this month.
I've reached what might be called round 1b, as the blogger reading my offering has axed 18 entries off the bat but put 9 (including Journey to Altmortis) onto a shortlist for the final. (There are 10 bloggers, each picks just 1 book to reach a final 10).
Still odds against, but nice to clear the first (half-) hurdle.
Anyway, as well as suggesting you give Journey to Altmortis a look, I'd recommend keeping at least a lazy eye on the contest. You might well find a self-published gem that you would otherwise have missed.
If there is anyone reading this site who has not read Mr. Dancer's books then they are missing a real treat. The trivial price he asks for them bears no correlation to the amount of enjoyment they provide. Buy one and I guarantee you will want to buy the next.
That plug was brought to you by the HurstLlama Literary Review Service, an independent organisation that has no commercial relationship with Morris_Dancer (though he can buy me a beer in September when I next visit Leeds).
@MikeK, As Britain would be better off out of the EU, surely the problems at Calais would be worse? After all, the better Britain looks compared to our continental brethren, the more the illegal immigrants will head for our shores, rather than hanging about in France
We would be thus bound by European human rights law in how we dealt with asylum claims, however. For example, we could enforce a policy of immediately deporting anyone who could clearly be shown to have come from a safe country.
Human rights legislation is not the problem. (Or more accurately, is not the whole problem.)
We can only deport people to places we can prove they have come from. And while we can probably hand people back to the French who we've caught in the tunnel, or exiting it. Ultimately, to deport someone, you need to have another country willing to accept the person. We are dependent on the willingness of other countries to accept those that we wish to deport. If we can't prove the person came in through France, rather than on the ferry from Rotterdam, then the French can simply refuse to accept said person.
Being more serious, warp drive. It's critical to expanding beyond the solar system. Arks could do it, but then you're creating separate worlds rather than an inter-connected civilisation.
Edited extra bit: thanks for the kind words, Mr. Llama.
Incidentally, I forgot to mention before that my pen name is Thaddeus White. Which is useful, if you want to give any of my books a go
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
Then the Right can't really preach much about having been pro-equality all along if they think that. They also can't then wonder why many BMEs don't vote for them.
I'd like to think that there are BME voters who do value freedom of association, property rights, and free speech.
And of course, the corollary of your argument is that Labour shouldn't wonder why they're struggling among White, or male voters.
Most BMEs do, but they see it them as equally important as equality not above it.
Labour are struggling among those demographics largely because of the immigration issue. The Tories are also struggling among women under 45.
That's a bold statement. Is there polling evidence for this? Or has someone appointed you spokeman for all of 'em?
Polling evidence: Labour getting most of BMEs votes.
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
Then the Right can't really preach much about having been pro-equality all along if they think that. They also can't then wonder why many BMEs don't vote for them.
I'd like to think that there are BME voters who do value freedom of association, property rights, and free speech.
And of course, the corollary of your argument is that Labour shouldn't wonder why they're struggling among White, or male voters.
Most BMEs do, but they see it them as equally important as equality not above it.
Labour are struggling among those demographics largely because of the immigration issue. The Tories are also struggling among women under 45.
That's a bold statement. Is there polling evidence for this? Or has someone appointed you spokeman for all of 'em?
Polling evidence: Labour getting most of BMEs votes.
@Sunil_Prasannan I actually agree. I certainly wouldn't say Black culture is a bastion of equality. I'm mixed race, and most of us need an intervention regarding equality - especially on homophobia.
The Tories have generally been a step behind, and yet they are painted as if they were in the dark ages.
I don't think they are in the dark ages, however I think that prior to Cameron they weren't the most inclusive of parties. I think the trouble is, the Tories have been seen as party that while arguing for equality of opportunity (I said this in a previous post) doesn't recognise the role prejudices such as sexism, racism, homophobia can do to hinder others opportunities and quality of life. Under Cameron, I think that's changed.
The fact is most people on the Right are instinctively skeptical of the State having a big role in enforcing equality. They tend to prioritize freedom of association, property rights, and free speech above equality. You could say it's the whole point of being right wing.
Then the Right can't really preach much about having been pro-equality all along if they think that. They also can't then wonder why many BMEs don't vote for them.
I'd like to think that there are BME voters who do value freedom of association, property rights, and free speech.
And of course, the corollary of your argument is that Labour shouldn't wonder why they're struggling among White, or male voters.
Most BMEs do, but they see it them as equally important as equality not above it.
Labour are struggling among those demographics largely because of the immigration issue. The Tories are also struggling among women under 45.
That's a bold statement. Is there polling evidence for this? Or has someone appointed you spokeman for all of 'em?
Polling evidence: Labour getting most of BMEs votes.
So the Conservatives do seem to be making some progress amongst ethnic minority voters… but it’s probably only a modest advance, as yet the huge Labour advantage amongst BME voters remains almost as large as it was at previous elections.
Sajid Javid seems to be a well tipped runner for all sorts of things. For a man of no apparent ability whatsoever that has to count as an achievement.
Gove aside though it's hard to find someone in that list you'd trust to go and buy a takeaway.
I know nothing about Hancock. The CV seems ok, but how can it be that such important posts are taken almost in absentia.
Osborne was a bit mediocre until recently, and justified in part all those doubts. However he's got to grips with things, and it's a very interesting programme that he's pursuing. He's benefited enormously though from just being the 'Chancellor-we-elected'.
Until there's a betfair market I'll keep my powder mostly dry.
Sajid Javid seems to be a well tipped runner for all sorts of things. For a man of no apparent ability whatsoever that has to count as an achievement.
Gove aside though it's hard to find someone in that list you'd trust to go and buy a takeaway.
I know nothing about Hancock. The CV seems ok, but how can it be that such important posts are taken almost in absentia.
Osborne was a bit mediocre until recently, and justified in part all those doubts. However he's got to grips with things, and it's a very interesting programme that he's pursuing. He's benefited enormously though from just being the 'Chancellor-we-elected'.
Until there's a betfair market I'll keep my powder mostly dry.
Yes. Not much to tempt me either. Not in terms of probability or ability.
The real test of a Chancellor will be managing the next recession and I think George will skip town before he needs to do so!
I can't help there - but that reminds me of Susanna on here who claimed to have N kids, got her degree whilst living in Cardboard City, but couldn't remember how old her children were. Or the year she graduated IIRC.
They aged 4yrs between two threads and she was terribly inconsistent with other small details. She even misspelled her own name more than once.
Some years ago there was someone posting on the internet, mainly on the Telegraph site as it was then, as Rosie Trees, or something like that, who purported to be a young single mother of "n" children (the number varied) and who had a phenomenal knowledge of politics, economics (both theory and practice) and social policy in post-war Europe. The poster was eventually unmasked as a Labour activist/Spad.
Does anyone remember the case and can anyone supply the name of the culprit?
Trolling, Astroturfing and Sock-puppetry are all part of the fun of the internet, and in the end it is the debate that matters rather than the person arguing it.
I have to confess that I am actually four separate individuals of completely different backgrounds and opinions (a middle class white liberal, a cantankerous Thatcherite hardass, an immigrant from equatorial guinea and a communist, who doesn't come out much)and that is the reason for any inconsistency of argument, I swear.
@MP_SE Well, the Tory view doesn't appear to be working....
Wins them elections which is what matters. Meanwhile Labour will be out of power for another 5, 10, xx years.
The Tory view of BME voters wins them elections? Really? It's that they are perceived as competent that does that.
I think the Tory view works best among upwardly mobile groups. 40 years ago, Jews voted Labour. Now, they vote Conservative. Hindus, East Asians, and Sikhs are shifting in the same direction. But, Black voters and Muslim voters are massively Labour.
Sajid Javid seems to be a well tipped runner for all sorts of things. For a man of no apparent ability whatsoever that has to count as an achievement.
Gove aside though it's hard to find someone in that list you'd trust to go and buy a takeaway.
I know nothing about Hancock. The CV seems ok, but how can it be that such important posts are taken almost in absentia.
Osborne was a bit mediocre until recently, and justified in part all those doubts. However he's got to grips with things, and it's a very interesting programme that he's pursuing. He's benefited enormously though from just being the 'Chancellor-we-elected'.
Until there's a betfair market I'll keep my powder mostly dry.
Yes. Not much to tempt me either. Not in terms of probability or ability.
The real test of a Chancellor will be managing the next recession and I think George will skip town before he needs to do so!
Only if he is very lucky. Recessions seem to happen about every ten years, on top of that we have China becoming every more wobbly and now, I read today, financial problems in the Dubai again (where Uk companies and banks are very exposed). So the chances of a recession or at least a serious downturn before the next general election are, in my view, better than evens.
@MP_SE Well, the Tory view doesn't appear to be working....
Wins them elections which is what matters. Meanwhile Labour will be out of power for another 5, 10, xx years.
The Tory view of BME voters wins them elections? Really? It's that they are perceived as competent that does that.
I think the Tory view works best among upwardly mobile groups. 40 years ago, Jews voted Labour. Now, they vote Conservative. Hindus, East Asians, and Sikhs are shifting in the same direction. But, Black voters and Muslim voters are massively Labour.
Tbf, that evidence appeared to be from British Future....the same survey that has been doubted.
@MP_SE Labour have 'apparently' been engaging in identity politics since 1997, and they won 3 consecutive elections. Can we say that identity politics wins elections? Obviously we can't. The Tories views on BME voters are neither here nor there regarding winning elections. Although judging from that PB thread on the issue an awful lot of Tories appear to be keen on getting BME groups to vote Tory.
Canadian election looks as though it will be interesting. "A new poll released on Sunday put the Conservatives only slightly ahead of the NDP, with the Liberals close behind - all of them at about 30%. Other polls have put the NDP slightly in the lead. Commentators said the three parties were essentially tied going into the election campaign." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33753061
Sajid Javid seems to be a well tipped runner for all sorts of things. For a man of no apparent ability whatsoever that has to count as an achievement.
Gove aside though it's hard to find someone in that list you'd trust to go and buy a takeaway.
I know nothing about Hancock. The CV seems ok, but how can it be that such important posts are taken almost in absentia.
Osborne was a bit mediocre until recently, and justified in part all those doubts. However he's got to grips with things, and it's a very interesting programme that he's pursuing. He's benefited enormously though from just being the 'Chancellor-we-elected'.
Until there's a betfair market I'll keep my powder mostly dry.
If a comprehensive-educated son of a bus driver becoming a multimillionaire shows 'no ability whatsoever', then I'd like to see what you think ability is.
@MikeK, As Britain would be better off out of the EU, surely the problems at Calais would be worse? After all, the better Britain looks compared to our continental brethren, the more the illegal immigrants will head for our shores, rather than hanging about in France
We would be thus bound by European human rights law in how we dealt with asylum claims, however. For example, we could enforce a policy of immediately deporting anyone who could clearly be shown to have come from a safe country.
Human rights legislation is not the problem. (Or more accurately, is not the whole problem.)
We can only deport people to places we can prove they have come from. And while we can probably hand people back to the French who we've caught in the tunnel, or exiting it. Ultimately, to deport someone, you need to have another country willing to accept the person. We are dependent on the willingness of other countries to accept those that we wish to deport. If we can't prove the person came in through France, rather than on the ferry from Rotterdam, then the French can simply refuse to accept said person.
That would depend where you are deporting them to. If we have large numbers of Sudanese and Eritreans turning up, we can assume they've come via Libya. I can't imagine the Libyan government being able to refuse them.
@MP_SE Well, the Tory view doesn't appear to be working....
Wins them elections which is what matters. Meanwhile Labour will be out of power for another 5, 10, xx years.
The Tory view of BME voters wins them elections? Really? It's that they are perceived as competent that does that.
I think the Tory view works best among upwardly mobile groups. 40 years ago, Jews voted Labour. Now, they vote Conservative. Hindus, East Asians, and Sikhs are shifting in the same direction. But, Black voters and Muslim voters are massively Labour.
Tbf, that evidence appeared to be from British Future....the same survey that has been doubted.
@MP_SE Labour have 'apparently' been engaging in identity politics since 1997, and they won 3 consecutive elections. Can we say that identity politics wins elections? Obviously we can't. The Tories views on BME voters are neither here nor there regarding winning elections. Although judging from that PB thread on the issue an awful lot of Tories appear to be keen on getting BME groups to vote Tory.
Identity politics is just one of the many reasons why Labour will not see power for many years. Instead of arguing about whether the Tories had the first female prime minister it might be worth looking at how Labour failed to win key seats such as North Warwickshire.
@MP_SE Well, the Tory view doesn't appear to be working....
Wins them elections which is what matters. Meanwhile Labour will be out of power for another 5, 10, xx years.
The Tory view of BME voters wins them elections? Really? It's that they are perceived as competent that does that.
I think the Tory view works best among upwardly mobile groups. 40 years ago, Jews voted Labour. Now, they vote Conservative. Hindus, East Asians, and Sikhs are shifting in the same direction. But, Black voters and Muslim voters are massively Labour.
Tbf, that evidence appeared to be from British Future....the same survey that has been doubted.
@MP_SE Labour have 'apparently' been engaging in identity politics since 1997, and they won 3 consecutive elections. Can we say that identity politics wins elections? Obviously we can't. The Tories views on BME voters are neither here nor there regarding winning elections. Although judging from that PB thread on the issue an awful lot of Tories appear to be keen on getting BME groups to vote Tory.
Identity politics is just one of the many reasons why Labour will not see power for many years. Instead of arguing about whether the Tories had the first female prime minister it might be worth looking at how Labour failed to win key seats such as North Warwickshire.
Immigration is probably the big issue not 'identity politics' - which I doubt your average person would even say in a survey.
Comments
They aged 4yrs between two threads and she was terribly inconsistent with other small details. She even misspelled her own name more than once.
Oh *she* was a hoot.
Trolling, Astroturfing and Sock-puppetry are all part of the fun of the internet, and in the end it is the debate that matters rather than the person arguing it.
I'm a conservative and while I wouldn't support complete equality of outcome, I would prefer we have more more equality of outcome than we currently do. I wouldn't support a society where only the top 10% can have comfortable middle class lives, even if there was a completely meritocratic race to getting there. In fact, I'd say that the desire to maintain the 20th Century's mass property-owning democracy is inherently a conservative desire.
Ash's increasingly contorted positions on why the unemployed can't travel to a job intv because they spent their last £2.50 on toothpaste remains a classic.
He must have argued that position over dozens of posts with varying sidenotes on his personal poverty in Merthyr.
Labour are struggling among those demographics largely because of the immigration issue. The Tories are also struggling among women under 45.
Quite why Dr Sox chose to lump that unpleasant individual in the same sentence as JackW's obvious and open use of a humorous affectation to overlay his true identity is anyone's guess.
Still, no-one could possibly impugn the important genetic research on land-walking superfish I conduct in the subterranean laboratory beneath Castle Morris Dancer.
Or has someone appointed you spokeman for all of 'em?
One form of equality can work against another. Mass immigration, for example, redistributes wealth from labour to capital, by placing downward pressure on wages, and upward pressure on property prices.
I've reached what might be called round 1b, as the blogger reading my offering has axed 18 entries off the bat but put 9 (including Journey to Altmortis) onto a shortlist for the final. (There are 10 bloggers, each picks just 1 book to reach a final 10).
Still odds against, but nice to clear the first (half-) hurdle.
Anyway, as well as suggesting you give Journey to Altmortis a look, I'd recommend keeping at least a lazy eye on the contest. You might well find a self-published gem that you would otherwise have missed.
http://mark---lawrence.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/the-great-self-published-fantasy-blog.html
And to measure equality of the masses against the extraordinary wealth of a fraction of the one per cent is, in my view, pointless. There are heights of income achieved by some that no-one realistically can aspire to. If they achieve it, serendipity undoubtedly played as much a role as preparation and application. And no government should be trying to legislate away luck.
I cede you point that equality of outcome and equality of opportunity are not entirely independent. But they are far from perfectly correlated either. I accept that some form of redistributive taxation is necessary (between rich and poor and between wealthy and poorer regions within the state). But legislating equality of outcome (save equal pay for equal work) strikes me as have only potential negative effects. And yes, I include quotas in that.
Mr. M, indeed, including the environmentally friendly solar death ray. The clean, sustainable way to execute miscreants.
Neuralyzer? Tricorder? Orgasmatron?
If there is anyone reading this site who has not read Mr. Dancer's books then they are missing a real treat. The trivial price he asks for them bears no correlation to the amount of enjoyment they provide. Buy one and I guarantee you will want to buy the next.
That plug was brought to you by the HurstLlama Literary Review Service, an independent organisation that has no commercial relationship with Morris_Dancer (though he can buy me a beer in September when I next visit Leeds).
We can only deport people to places we can prove they have come from. And while we can probably hand people back to the French who we've caught in the tunnel, or exiting it. Ultimately, to deport someone, you need to have another country willing to accept the person. We are dependent on the willingness of other countries to accept those that we wish to deport. If we can't prove the person came in through France, rather than on the ferry from Rotterdam, then the French can simply refuse to accept said person.
The orgasmatron does sound intriguing.
Being more serious, warp drive. It's critical to expanding beyond the solar system. Arks could do it, but then you're creating separate worlds rather than an inter-connected civilisation.
Edited extra bit: thanks for the kind words, Mr. Llama.
Incidentally, I forgot to mention before that my pen name is Thaddeus White. Which is useful, if you want to give any of my books a go
That's the bunny! I thought there was a K in the name somewhere. Thanks, Mr Mark.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33754005
That claim is slipping into history...
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/05/25/new-research-finds-that-the-tories-took-a-third-of-the-ethnic-minority-vote-at-ge2015/
“Are you going to make sure the Sikh vote turns out for us?”
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/588242783317712896
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9432#comments
So the Conservatives do seem to be making some progress amongst ethnic minority voters… but it’s probably only a modest advance, as yet the huge Labour advantage amongst BME voters remains almost as large as it was at previous elections.
Gove aside though it's hard to find someone in that list you'd trust to go and buy a takeaway.
I know nothing about Hancock. The CV seems ok, but how can it be that such important posts are taken almost in absentia.
Osborne was a bit mediocre until recently, and justified in part all those doubts. However he's got to grips with things, and it's a very interesting programme that he's pursuing. He's benefited enormously though from just being the 'Chancellor-we-elected'.
Until there's a betfair market I'll keep my powder mostly dry.
The real test of a Chancellor will be managing the next recession and I think George will skip town before he needs to do so!
@MP_SE Labour have 'apparently' been engaging in identity politics since 1997, and they won 3 consecutive elections. Can we say that identity politics wins elections? Obviously we can't. The Tories views on BME voters are neither here nor there regarding winning elections. Although judging from that PB thread on the issue an awful lot of Tories appear to be keen on getting BME groups to vote Tory.
It'll be interesting to see how the start goes at Spa.
"A new poll released on Sunday put the Conservatives only slightly ahead of the NDP, with the Liberals close behind - all of them at about 30%. Other polls have put the NDP slightly in the lead.
Commentators said the three parties were essentially tied going into the election campaign."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33753061
Corbyn 2.66/2.68
Burnham 2.70/2.82
What is driving this?
A sense that some people may get cold feet and decide not to back Corbyn at the last moment?
Plus maybe a question over whether young Corbyn supporters will actually turnout?
https://twitter.com/robindbrant/status/627925466654052352
Win or lose, the damage has already been done.
New Thread
BIB: You can do both, you know.