Maybe. First time anything from Jeremy Corbyn has raised a smile in a long time.
Of course if I wanted to be an arsehole I'd ask where is his response to a number of more important things in the news this week, but as a standalone tweet it's quite good.
Maybe. First time anything from Jeremy Corbyn has raised a smile in a long time.
Of course if I wanted to be an arsehole I'd ask where is his response to a number of more important things in the news this week, but as a standalone tweet it's quite good.
It is 100% not Jezza's own work. At least he didn't do an Ed and talk about something like Play your Craps Rights...
The interesting question is when the Chinese population reaches breaking point in terms of widening inequality and demands less guns and more butter. Regardless of the timing, it seems crazy to me for the USA to attempt to maintain hegemony, particularly in Asia. The USA can only do so through war and/or total transformation of its own society through massive immigration, which Americans will never vote for!
Thanks for your kind words earlier! Democracies do often vote for things that voters don't want, because of the way issues get bundled together. In this country, over the last 30 years or so, I don't believe most voters would have backed either the scale of migration to the UK or the extent to which we have become integrated into the EU if given the explicit choice in referenda. (My point here is not that these are good or bad policies, but rather that policies are sometimes enacted over the will of the electorate in a way that a voter in a FPTP election can do very little about. Doubly so if they're in a safe seat - though in America, at least primaries open things up a bit. Both of my examples are things that involve small cumulative changes whose full effect is only visible once added up over time, which I don't think is a coincidence - seems logical that such a policy is ones of the easiest to slip past the disagreement of the electorate. But it might just be that I'm being unimaginative.)
Purely speculative here, since I can't see forces coalescing in the correct way, but suppose there were a serious and explicitly "pro-business, growth at all costs, in the national interest" faction in the Republican party. Even if they formed only a quarter or so(*) of Republican law-makers they could probably force through a more liberal immigration policy, regardless of whether the majority of the American electorate opposed it. They'd need to stitch something up with the Democrats, so no doubt would come coupled with amnesty arrangements etc for those already there and it wouldn't just be a global talent-grab. But provided those pro-growth Republicans had strong local support bases, there's not a heck of a lot either the rest of the electorate or the rest of the Republican Party could have done about it. If the act passed and survived a decade or so, it becomes harder and harder to repeal because it becomes more important not to repel immigrant voters.
(*) If you look at the legislative history of the DREAM Act (albeit this is not quite analogous to what I think an extreme pro-growthist might advocate) it had a few attempts where it came quite close to passing, and perhaps would have done if Democrats had conceded that the more liberal rules be backed up by tougher immigration enforcement.
"Among the confirmed guests are Joe Biggs, who used to work for the conspiracy-mongering website Infowars, as well as Shiva Ayyadurai, a scientist who claims to have invented email and is now running for the Senate."
The thing is there are legitimate sensible people who are really big on free speech e.g the likes of Dave Rubin...but that sounds like a nutjob rally.
To add to what I said up-thread, I think it's very difficult for democracies to be run purely for GDP growth to maintain relative hierarchical position, because of the societal disruption involved and the way rapid growth undermines attempts at redistribution. Look at Brexit, and further back how the US slammed on the brakes for immigration in the early 1920s.
To get back to the important issue of century old statues: The slamming closed of the immigration door to the USA in the Twenties, the revival of the KKK and the rise of economic and diplomatic isolationism were all related in time, and the raising of Confederate statues fits in the cultural meme.
Immigration was perceived as changing the WASP character of America, particularly racially via Catholic and Jewish immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe as well as foreign influences such as Communism and Anarchism. These were the roots of nostalgia for the Old South as much as the films "Birth of a Nation" and "Gone With the Wind" or Minstrel songs. The Confederate statues are part of quite a marked cultural shift.
It can be seen as a function of the old Nativist/recent immigrant divide which rears its head at times of economic dislocation. The KKK were as much anti-Catholic as anti-Jew or Black. There were simply more Blacks conveniently located in the South to persecute.
Anti-Catholicism has metamorphosised into anti-Mexican/ Puerto Rican sentiment (as recent incomers), whereas the Catholic targets of the past (Irish, Poles and Italians, amongst others), are now part of the Native group, and indeed hold high level positions in the political hierarchy. Muslims also tend to be either recent immigrants, or their offspring, or politically-motivated converts. Hence the animus.
I think this can also explain much of the Bannon philosophy too, and why he does not favour White immigration. He is actually a Nativist, which stretches back to the Know Nothings and beyond. It has a long tradition in US politics. Look after those who have roots there first.
The economic warfare with China is merely a projection of economic warfare at home. Defend and prioritise the natives.
So May is now only twice as unpopular as Corbyn? And less popular here than Trump is in the US? Strike up the band!
A twenty point improvement is not to be sniffed at
Yeah I bet Cameron's rating never improved by that wide a margin, so even TSE must surely now concede she is the better PM.
But it is correct that she is more unpopular with the UK - almost twice as unpopular - as Trump is with the US. Remarkable.
Not that remarkable. Partisans tend to stick with their own and the US is more two-party partisan than we are.
The UK is split into red and blue and yellow and orange and purple and green ...
What proportion of the UK identifies as Tory versus Americans identify as Republican?
Being a Republican in the US has nowhere near the (well deserved) social stigma that being a Tory has in the UK not it's not really comparable.
44% of the UK population are Tories, similar to the proportion of the US who are Republicans.
Er... how did you work that out?
Perhaps they are counting Blairites as Tories.
The Tories+UKIP got 50% at general election 2015 and 44% at general election 2017. The Republicans won 47% at the 2012 presidential election and 46% at the 2016 presidential election
Indeed. Was just about to remark on that. No doubt Brucie was a big star, but, he was 89. Can not see this a bigger story than Barcelona or Bannon.
Sir Bruce was probably the greatest all round entertainer from the UK of the last century, his death is a one off, Islamic terrorism and Trump's problems will be in the news for months and years to come
Indeed. Was just about to remark on that. No doubt Brucie was a big star, but, he was 89. Can not see this a bigger story than Barcelona or Bannon.
Sir Bruce was probably the greatest all round entertainer from the UK of the last century, his death is a one off, Islamic terrorism and Trump's problems will be in the news for months and years to come
I do understand that. The Generation Game was a big part of my childhood. I was in no way denigrating him. Indeed he deserves a long segment on the News. Maybe we are so inured to psychopathic nutters and Trumpish shambles, that they are no longer news?
It's laughable how you Tories love bashing great British institutions like the NT, BBC, NHS etc. Why can't you be a bit more patriotic!
Erhhh you realize I am not a Tory...until 2017 I had never voted for them at a GE. It was only the prospect of Jahadi Jez that meant I had to tactically vote for Kim Jong May.
The story makes the NT appear to be total twats. Sacking some bloke who has done the same job at that property for donkeys years because he hasn't got his NVQ in lawn mowing.
I apologise for misrepresenting you Mr U, although you've fooled me with a few of your posts (and if you voted Tory last time you are counted in Sean_F's 44%, just saying).
As a relative newbie it'd be really helpful if everyone could just indicate on a scale 1 to 10 (leftwing to rightwing) where they fit on the political scale (Id be about 3.5 I reckon)
But back to the topic: the Torygraph, Mail, Sun etc. and many r/w Tories love nothing better than to bash institutiomn that we should be really proud of. Of course they cock things up from time to time - every big organisation does (especially private companies btw and no doubt the r/w press cock things up occasionally too!). But overall generally don't get the credit they deserve and I wonder how much is because they don't fit the tory free enterprise ideal. The BBC and NT in particular are envied in many arts of the world.
Once again - apologies for call ing you a Tory - a terrible slur, can't think of a worse one
In my personal experience the NT is malicious and manipulative. But then we have a relatively unusual relationship with them
Indeed. Was just about to remark on that. No doubt Brucie was a big star, but, he was 89. Can not see this a bigger story than Barcelona or Bannon.
Sir Bruce was probably the greatest all round entertainer from the UK of the last century, his death is a one off, Islamic terrorism and Trump's problems will be in the news for months and years to come
I do understand that. The Generation Game was a big part of my childhood. I was in no way denigrating him. Indeed he deserves a long segment on the News. Maybe we are so inured to psychopathic nutters and Trumpish shambles, that they are no longer news?
They are news stories of course, just endlessly repeated sadly
Ex-BBC News correspondent Liz MacKean has died after suffering a stroke. MacKean, 52, worked for the corporation for more than 20 years but left in in 2013 amid a row over the decision to shelve her investigation for Newsnight about disgraced DJ Jimmy Savile.
Indeed. Was just about to remark on that. No doubt Brucie was a big star, but, he was 89. Can not see this a bigger story than Barcelona or Bannon.
Sir Bruce was probably the greatest all round entertainer from the UK of the last century, his death is a one off, Islamic terrorism and Trump's problems will be in the news for months and years to come
I do understand that. The Generation Game was a big part of my childhood. I was in no way denigrating him. Indeed he deserves a long segment on the News. Maybe we are so inured to psychopathic nutters and Trumpish shambles, that they are no longer news?
They are news stories of course, just endlessly repeated sadly
So true unfortunately. ps, Commiserations on your electoral result. I am sure you would have made a diligent, informed and conscientious councillor, even though you are not my particular choice of stripe. Best of luck next time!
Indeed. Was just about to remark on that. No doubt Brucie was a big star, but, he was 89. Can not see this a bigger story than Barcelona or Bannon.
Sir Bruce was probably the greatest all round entertainer from the UK of the last century, his death is a one off, Islamic terrorism and Trump's problems will be in the news for months and years to come
I do understand that. The Generation Game was a big part of my childhood. I was in no way denigrating him. Indeed he deserves a long segment on the News. Maybe we are so inured to psychopathic nutters and Trumpish shambles, that they are no longer news?
They are news stories of course, just endlessly repeated sadly
So true unfortunately. ps, Commiserations on your electoral result. I am sure you would have made a diligent, informed and conscientious councillor, even though you are not my particular choice of stripe. Best of luck next time!
Thanks and yes I will likely try again in 2019, night
The economic warfare with China is merely a projection of economic warfare at home. Defend and prioritise the natives.
Or it could be bollocks.
I actually reckon you are onto something with the "nativist" tradition. Suspect it is closer to the button than the pure white nationalism he is sometimes accused of.
But the economic warfare thing, I'm not satisfied that I get where it's coming from. Is it about making Americans rich? Making the Chinese poor? Making sure that America (the state, or the people?) is still Top Dog? Is the whole thing a fabrication, a useful external bogeyman to focus attention on? Or (and this is what Bannon seems to claim) is it the real driving force of his philosophy, while all the other rows e.g. about immigration are part red meat for voters, part to wind up and distract the Left, getting them to rabbit on about stuff that doesn't connect with the voters while he goes after the really big issues?
I'm not convinced that Trump is especially ideological, and if Bannon is out then Bannonism is probably out too. So it is probably a bit late in the day to try and understand it! But I would like to make a genuine attempt at it. Doubt I shall find very much to agree with, but that's not the point - right now I'm struggling to see how the world (particularly China and the economy) looks from his point of view.
The economic warfare with China is merely a projection of economic warfare at home. Defend and prioritise the natives.
Or it could be bollocks.
I actually reckon you are onto something with the "nativist" tradition. Suspect it is closer to the button than the pure white nationalism he is sometimes accused of.
But the economic warfare thing, I'm not satisfied that I get where it's coming from. Is it about making Americans rich? Making the Chinese poor? Making sure that America (the state, or the people?) is still Top Dog? Is the whole thing a fabrication, a useful external bogeyman to focus attention on? Or (and this is what Bannon seems to claim) is it the real driving force of his philosophy, while all the other rows e.g. about immigration are part red meat for voters, part to wind up and distract the Left, getting them to rabbit on about stuff that doesn't connect with the voters while he goes after the really big issues?
I'm not convinced that Trump is especially ideological, and if Bannon is out then Bannonism is probably out too. So it is probably a bit late in the day to try and understand it! But I would like to make a genuine attempt at it. Doubt I shall find very much to agree with, but that's not the point - right now I'm struggling to see how the world (particularly China and the economy) looks from his point of view.
Found your original long post genuinely thought-provoking, and in the best traditions of the site. Went away, had a few shandies, and posted my thoughts. Not sure I am in any position to think further right now. I do wonder if Obama had been fully Black, with an ancestry traceable back to slavery if he would have excited so much animus? As for the rest? Above my pay grade.
To add to what I said up-thread, I think it's very difficult for democracies to be run purely for GDP growth to maintain relative hierarchical position, because of the societal disruption involved and the way rapid growth undermines attempts at redistribution. Look at Brexit, and further back how the US slammed on the brakes for immigration in the early 1920s.
To get back to the important issue of century old statues: The slamming closed of the immigration door to the USA in the Twenties, the revival of the KKK and the rise of economic and diplomatic isolationism were all related in time, and the raising of Confederate statues fits in the cultural meme.
Immigration was perceived as changing the WASP character of America, particularly racially via Catholic and Jewish immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe as well as foreign influences such as Communism and Anarchism. These were the roots of nostalgia for the Old South as much as the films "Birth of a Nation" and "Gone With the Wind" or Minstrel songs. The Confederate statues are part of quite a marked cultural shift.
It can be seen as a function of the old Nativist/recent immigrant divide which rears its head at times of economic dislocation. The KKK were as much anti-Catholic as anti-Jew or Black. There were simply more Blacks conveniently located in the South to persecute.
Anti-Catholicism has metamorphosised into anti-Mexican/ Puerto Rican sentiment (as recent incomers), whereas the Catholic targets of the past (Irish, Poles and Italians, amongst others), are now part of the Native group, and indeed hold high level positions in the political hierarchy. Muslims also tend to be either recent immigrants, or their offspring, or politically-motivated converts. Hence the animus.
I think this can also explain much of the Bannon philosophy too, and why he does not favour White immigration. He is actually a Nativist, which stretches back to the Know Nothings and beyond. It has a long tradition in US politics. Look after those who have roots there first.
The economic warfare with China is merely a projection of economic warfare at home. Defend and prioritise the natives.
To add to what I said up-thread, I think it's very difficult for democracies to be run purely for GDP growth to maintain relative hierarchical position, because of the societal disruption involved and the way rapid growth undermines attempts at redistribution. Look at Brexit, and further back how the US slammed on the brakes for immigration in the early 1920s.
It can be seen as a function of the old Nativist/recent immigrant divide which rears its head at times of economic dislocation. The KKK were as much anti-Catholic as anti-Jew or Black. There were simply more Blacks conveniently located in the South to persecute.
Anti-Catholicism has metamorphosised into anti-Mexican/ Puerto Rican sentiment (as recent incomers), whereas the Catholic targets of the past (Irish, Poles and Italians, amongst others), are now part of the Native group, and indeed hold high level positions in the political hierarchy. Muslims also tend to be either recent immigrants, or their offspring, or politically-motivated converts. Hence the animus.
I think this can also explain much of the Bannon philosophy too, and why he does not favour White immigration. He is actually a Nativist, which stretches back to the Know Nothings and beyond. It has a long tradition in US politics. Look after those who have roots there first.
The economic warfare with China is merely a projection of economic warfare at home. Defend and prioritise the natives.
Or it could be bollocks.
No, I don't think it is bollocks. The Natavist vs newer migrant community explains a lot of US politics, though not the status of African Americans whose presence antedates the majority of immigration there. The issues around African Americans have strong similarities to class related issues in our own politics, though also some differences.
Despite its vaunted culture of self improvement and of opportunity America is a very class bound society. African Americans and blue collar white Americans are both on the outside looking in when it comes to economic success in America, particularly so with the decline of industrial employment due to Chinese manufacturing. I see this as a major driver of the US Culture wars.
To add to what I said up-thread, I think it's very difficult for democracies to be run purely for GDP growth to maintain relative hierarchical position, because of the societal disruption involved and the way rapid growth undermines attempts at redistribution. Look at Brexit, and further back how the US slammed on the brakes for immigration in the early 1920s.
To get back to the important issue of century old statues: The slamming closed of the immigration door to the USA in the Twenties, the revival of the KKK and the rise of economic and diplomatic isolationism were all related in time, and the raising of Confederate statues fits in the cultural meme.
Immigration was perceived as changing the WASP character of America, particularly racially via Catholic and Jewish immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe as well as foreign influences such as Communism and Anarchism. These were the roots of nostalgia for the Old South as much as the films "Birth of a Nation" and "Gone With the Wind" or Minstrel songs. The Confederate statues are part of quite a marked cultural shift.
It can be seen as a function of the old Nativist/recent immigrant divide which rears its head at times of economic dislocation. The KKK were as much anti-Catholic as anti-Jew or Black. There were simply more Blacks conveniently located in the South to persecute.
Anti-Catholicism has metamorphosised into anti-Mexican/ Puerto Rican sentiment (as recent incomers), whereas the Catholic targets of the past (Irish, Poles and Italians, amongst others), are now part of the Native group, and indeed hold high level positions in the political hierarchy. Muslims also tend to be either recent immigrants, or their offspring, or politically-motivated converts. Hence the animus.
I think this can also explain much of the Bannon philosophy too, and why he does not favour White immigration. He is actually a Nativist, which stretches back to the Know Nothings and beyond. It has a long tradition in US politics. Look after those who have roots there first.
The economic warfare with China is merely a projection of economic warfare at home. Defend and prioritise the natives.
Or it could be bollocks.
Where does Raheem Kassam fall in all this ?
He is British, not American, surely? While we have some things in common with our American cousins, not evveryything matches.
Comments
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4803858/Far-right-activists-clash-anti-facists-Barcelona.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/18/boston-free-speech-rally-organisers-say-fear-far-right-groups/
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/898315234842206208
Of course if I wanted to be an arsehole I'd ask where is his response to a number of more important things in the news this week, but as a standalone tweet it's quite good.
Purely speculative here, since I can't see forces coalescing in the correct way, but suppose there were a serious and explicitly "pro-business, growth at all costs, in the national interest" faction in the Republican party. Even if they formed only a quarter or so(*) of Republican law-makers they could probably force through a more liberal immigration policy, regardless of whether the majority of the American electorate opposed it. They'd need to stitch something up with the Democrats, so no doubt would come coupled with amnesty arrangements etc for those already there and it wouldn't just be a global talent-grab. But provided those pro-growth Republicans had strong local support bases, there's not a heck of a lot either the rest of the electorate or the rest of the Republican Party could have done about it. If the act passed and survived a decade or so, it becomes harder and harder to repeal because it becomes more important not to repel immigrant voters.
(*) If you look at the legislative history of the DREAM Act (albeit this is not quite analogous to what I think an extreme pro-growthist might advocate) it had a few attempts where it came quite close to passing, and perhaps would have done if Democrats had conceded that the more liberal rules be backed up by tougher immigration enforcement.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4800164/David-Bowie-slept-13-year-olds-engaged-orgies.html
"Among the confirmed guests are Joe Biggs, who used to work for the conspiracy-mongering website Infowars, as well as Shiva Ayyadurai, a scientist who claims to have invented email and is now running for the Senate."
The thing is there are legitimate sensible people who are really big on free speech e.g the likes of Dave Rubin...but that sounds like a nutjob rally.
It can be seen as a function of the old Nativist/recent immigrant divide which rears its head at times of economic dislocation. The KKK were as much anti-Catholic as anti-Jew or Black. There were simply more Blacks conveniently located in the South to persecute.
Anti-Catholicism has metamorphosised into anti-Mexican/ Puerto Rican sentiment (as recent incomers), whereas the Catholic targets of the past (Irish, Poles and Italians, amongst others), are now part of the Native group, and indeed hold high level positions in the political hierarchy. Muslims also tend to be either recent immigrants, or their offspring, or politically-motivated converts. Hence the animus.
I think this can also explain much of the Bannon philosophy too, and why he does not favour White immigration. He is actually a Nativist, which stretches back to the Know Nothings and beyond. It has a long tradition in US politics. Look after those who have roots there first.
The economic warfare with China is merely a projection of economic warfare at home. Defend and prioritise the natives.
Or it could be bollocks.
Ex-BBC News correspondent Liz MacKean has died after suffering a stroke.
MacKean, 52, worked for the corporation for more than 20 years but left in in 2013 amid a row over the decision to shelve her investigation for Newsnight about disgraced DJ Jimmy Savile.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40981585
ps, Commiserations on your electoral result. I am sure you would have made a diligent, informed and conscientious councillor, even though you are not my particular choice of stripe. Best of luck next time!
But the economic warfare thing, I'm not satisfied that I get where it's coming from. Is it about making Americans rich? Making the Chinese poor? Making sure that America (the state, or the people?) is still Top Dog? Is the whole thing a fabrication, a useful external bogeyman to focus attention on? Or (and this is what Bannon seems to claim) is it the real driving force of his philosophy, while all the other rows e.g. about immigration are part red meat for voters, part to wind up and distract the Left, getting them to rabbit on about stuff that doesn't connect with the voters while he goes after the really big issues?
I'm not convinced that Trump is especially ideological, and if Bannon is out then Bannonism is probably out too. So it is probably a bit late in the day to try and understand it! But I would like to make a genuine attempt at it. Doubt I shall find very much to agree with, but that's not the point - right now I'm struggling to see how the world (particularly China and the economy) looks from his point of view.
Went away, had a few shandies, and posted my thoughts. Not sure I am in any position to think further right now. I do wonder if Obama had been fully Black, with an ancestry traceable back to slavery if he would have excited so much animus?
As for the rest? Above my pay grade.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/18/john-mcdonnell-labour-interview-power-tories-incompetent
Scanning the article quickly I assumed he was predicting a Davisdon coup.
https://twitter.com/ChelseaClinton/status/898335002697412608
The Lucifer of Liège
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_génie_du_mal
Despite its vaunted culture of self improvement and of opportunity America is a very class bound society. African Americans and blue collar white Americans are both on the outside looking in when it comes to economic success in America, particularly so with the decline of industrial employment due to Chinese manufacturing. I see this as a major driver of the US Culture wars.