I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
Wasn't there some chap called something like Jean Claude Juncker who said something along the lines of sometimes you have to lie, or something like that? Or didn't he say that? Or is it a different Jean Claude Juncker I'm mistaking him for? Oh well must be me then.
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
Boris is pitching for the Tory leadership. That is the only way to view this speech. It is the only way to view his political career. And a lot of Tories like his buccaneering English nationalism with its ceaseless, sly digs at foreigners. I would not bet against him being successful and then being the third abysmal Tory PM in a row!
I find this constant attempt to accuse Leavers of having "English nationalism" is both odd and revealing. Two of the four home nations wanted to leave and the flag-waving element of Leave was always around the Union Jack. I'm guessing the attempt to axe-grind against the English is hoping to stir up divisions between the home nations by tapping into Anglophobia. Or perhaps it's because British is more or a civic identity so they are trying to frame English nationalism as an ethnic nationalism and incite us brown leavers against those white racists. It seems rather ugly either way.
Why would I axe grind against the English? I am English and know that buccaneering Tory English nationalism is not a majority view in the country where I was born and brought up.
I just said the reasons in the post you responded to.
But George Orwell comes to mind: "England is the only great country in the world whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality."
While it is flattering to be considered an intellectual, I doubt many people who know me would confuse me with one :-D
I am not ashamed to be English. I just deeply dislike right wing, Tory English nationalism. I do not believe that the Tory right owns English identity, culture or history.
Your third post on the topic and you just reassert the claim. I voted Labour in every election in my adult life until the last one but even I can see Tories are British in their nationalism/patriotism. It's Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory they love at the Proms. You just reassert this English nationalist accusation to stir division. It is ugly.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." Johnson (no not that one!)
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
Boris is pitching for the Tory leadership. That is the only way to view this speech. It is the only way to view his political career. And a lot of Tories like his buccaneering English nationalism with its ceaseless, sly digs at foreigners. I would not bet against him being successful and then being the third abysmal Tory PM in a row!
I find this constant attempt to accuse Leavers of having "English nationalism" is both odd and revealing. Two of the four home nations wanted to leave and the flag-waving element of Leave was always around the Union Jack. I'm guessing the attempt to axe-grind against the English is hoping to stir up divisions between the home nations by tapping into Anglophobia. Or perhaps it's because British is more or a civic identity so they are trying to frame English nationalism as an ethnic nationalism and incite us brown leavers against those white racists. It seems rather ugly either way.
Why would I axe grind against the English? I am English and know that buccaneering Tory English nationalism is not a majority view in the country where I was born and brought up.
I just said the reasons in the post you responded to.
But George Orwell comes to mind: "England is the only great country in the world whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality."
While it is flattering to be considered an intellectual, I doubt many people who know me would confuse me with one :-D
I am not ashamed to be English. I just deeply dislike right wing, Tory English nationalism. I do not believe that the Tory right owns English identity, culture or history.
I think we do because your lot gave it up.
No, you don't. The kind of people who label their political opponents traitors will never be a majority in England.
nor will those who label them hate-filled xenophobes.
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
Surely joining the EU weakened our case to retain the UNSC ?
Boris is pitching for the Tory leadership. That is the only way to view this speech. It is the only way to view his political career. And a lot of Tories like his buccaneering English nationalism with its ceaseless, sly digs at foreigners. I would not bet against him being successful and then being the third abysmal Tory PM in a row!
I find this constant attempt to accuse Leavers of having "English nationalism" is both odd and revealing. Two of the four home nations wanted to leave and the flag-waving element of Leave was always around the Union Jack. I'm guessing the attempt to axe-grind against the English is hoping to stir up divisions between the home nations by tapping into Anglophobia. Or perhaps it's because British is more or a civic identity so they are trying to frame English nationalism as an ethnic nationalism and incite us brown leavers against those white racists. It seems rather ugly either way.
Why would I axe grind against the English? I am English and know that buccaneering Tory English nationalism is not a majority view in the country where I was born and brought up.
I just said the reasons in the post you responded to.
But George Orwell comes to mind: "England is the only great country in the world whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality."
While it is flattering to be considered an intellectual, I doubt many people who know me would confuse me with one :-D
I am not ashamed to be English. I just deeply dislike right wing, Tory English nationalism. I do not believe that the Tory right owns English identity, culture or history.
Your third post on the topic and you just reassert the claim. I voted Labour in every election in my adult life until the last one but even I can see Tories are British in their nationalism/patriotism. It's Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory they love at the Proms. You just reassert this English nationalist accusation to stir division. It is ugly.
I disagree, I think a lot of right wing Tories - including Johnson and Rees Moog - equate Britishness with Englishness. I think you can see this, for example, in their complete inability to take the Irish border issue seriously. Of course, the third song that is always sung loudly and lustily at the Proms is Jerusalem.
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
Hmm I disagree slightly on Trident here. I'm opposed to it in principle as a gigantic waste of cash but the one good reason for keeping it post Brexit is precisely because of the positive diplomatic effect it has with our NATO allies (We're expected to bear the burden of being one of the nuclear powers in there basically)
Mind you I note there seems to be no sanctions being applied to Turkey who were invading a neighbouring country last time I checked...
Trident replacement looks doomed. The tories are not going to be able to stay in power long enough to get it to the too-big-to-cancel stage.
Boris is pitching for the Tory leadership. That is the only way to view this speech. It is the only way to view his political career. And a lot of Tories like his buccaneering English nationalism with its ceaseless, sly digs at foreigners. I would not bet against him being successful and then being the third abysmal Tory PM in a row!
I find this constant attempt to accuse Leavers of having "English nationalism" is both odd and revealing. Two of the four home nations wanted to leave and the flag-waving element of Leave was always around the Union Jack. I'm guessing the attempt to axe-grind against the English is hoping to stir up divisions between the home nations by tapping into Anglophobia. Or perhaps it's because British is more or a civic identity so they are trying to frame English nationalism as an ethnic nationalism and incite us brown leavers against those white racists. It seems rather ugly either way.
Why would I axe grind against the English? I am English and know that buccaneering Tory English nationalism is not a majority view in the country where I was born and brought up.
I just said the reasons in the post you responded to.
But George Orwell comes to mind: "England is the only great country in the world whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality."
While it is flattering to be considered an intellectual, I doubt many people who know me would confuse me with one :-D
I am not ashamed to be English. I just deeply dislike right wing, Tory English nationalism. I do not believe that the Tory right owns English identity, culture or history.
Your third post on the topic and you just reassert the claim. I voted Labour in every election in my adult life until the last one but even I can see Tories are British in their nationalism/patriotism. It's Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory they love at the Proms. You just reassert this English nationalist accusation to stir division. It is ugly.
I disagree, I think a lot of right wing Tories - including Johnson and Rees Moog - equate Britishness with Englishness. I think you can see this, for example, in their complete inability to take the Irish border issue seriously. Of course, the third song that is always sung loudly and lustily at the Proms is Jerusalem.
I disagree, I think a lot of right wing Tories - including Johnson and Rees Moog - equate Britishness with Englishness. I think you can see this, for example, in their complete inability to take the Irish border issue seriously. Of course, the third song that is always sung loudly and lustily at the Proms is Jerusalem.
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
As a permanent member of the UNSC since its foundation we cannot be removed unless we give up our seat (as perhaps France could eventually do for the EU).
Norway makes a NATO contribution proportionate to its size
Boris is pitching for the Tory leadership. That is the only way to view this speech. It is the only way to view his political career. And a lot of Tories like his buccaneering English nationalism with its ceaseless, sly digs at foreigners. I would not bet against him being successful and then being the third abysmal Tory PM in a row!
I find this constant attempt to accuse Leavers of having "English nationalism" is both odd and revealing. Two of the four home nations wanted to leave and the flag-waving element of Leave was always around the Union Jack. I'm guessing the attempt to axe-grind against the English is hoping to stir up divisions between the home nations by tapping into Anglophobia. Or perhaps it's because British is more or a civic identity so they are trying to frame English nationalism as an ethnic nationalism and incite us brown leavers against those white racists. It seems rather ugly either way.
Why would I axe grind against the English? I am English and know that buccaneering Tory English nationalism is not a majority view in the country where I was born and brought up.
I just said the reasons in the post you responded to.
But George Orwell comes to mind: "England is the only great country in the world whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality."
While it is flattering to be considered an intellectual, I doubt many people who know me would confuse me with one :-D
I am not ashamed to be English. I just deeply dislike right wing, Tory English nationalism. I do not believe that the Tory right owns English identity, culture or history.
Your third post on the topic and you just reassert the claim. I voted Labour in every election in my adult life until the last one but even I can see Tories are British in their nationalism/patriotism. It's Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory they love at the Proms. You just reassert this English nationalist accusation to stir division. It is ugly.
I disagree, I think a lot of right wing Tories - including Johnson and Rees Moog - equate Britishness with Englishness. I think you can see this, for example, in their complete inability to take the Irish border issue seriously. Of course, the third song that is always sung loudly and lustily at the Proms is Jerusalem.
I disagree, I think a lot of right wing Tories - including Johnson and Rees Moog - equate Britishness with Englishness. I think you can see this, for example, in their complete inability to take the Irish border issue seriously. Of course, the third song that is always sung loudly and lustily at the Proms is Jerusalem.
Promenaders are right-wing Tories? Who knew?
Nah, but a lot of right wing Tories are Promenaders.
Boris is pitching for the Tory leadership. That is the only way to view this speech. It is the only way to view his political career. And a lot of Tories like his buccaneering English nationalism with its ceaseless, sly digs at foreigners. I would not bet against him being successful and then being the third abysmal Tory PM in a row!
Why would I axe grind against the English? I am English and know that buccaneering Tory English nationalism is not a majority view in the country where I was born and brought up.
I just said the reasons in the post you responded to.
But George Orwell comes to mind: "England is the only great country in the world whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality."
While it is flattering to be considered an intellectual, I doubt many people who know me would confuse me with one :-D
I am not ashamed to be English. I just deeply dislike right wing, Tory English nationalism. I do not believe that the Tory right owns English identity, culture or history.
Your third post on the topic and you just reassert the claim. I voted Labour in every election in my adult life until the last one but even I can see Tories are British in their nationalism/patriotism. It's Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory they love at the Proms. You just reassert this English nationalist accusation to stir division. It is ugly.
I disagree, I think a lot of right wing Tories - including Johnson and Rees Moog - equate Britishness with Englishness. I think you can see this, for example, in their complete inability to take the Irish border issue seriously. Of course, the third song that is always sung loudly and lustily at the Proms is Jerusalem.
For your only actual justification for the English nationalist claim, that's incredibly weak. For a start British identity existed for almost a century before Ireland was annexed.
And which Jerusalem are you talking about? The one that's the unofficial anthem of the Labour Party? That one?
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
Boris is clever, but that is a task beyond even him.
I don't disagree with that; Boris is Boris, and he certainly wouldn't be my choice for next PM (unless the alternative were JRM!). Even the entertainment value of Boris is wearing a bit thin. I expect that this speech will be quickly forgotten. It was quite interesting and fine as far as it goes, and I hope it signals a more general and concerted effort by the government to be more inclusive, but this is a marathon, not a sprint.
Why, on a day when the main story is Boris Johnson's magnificent speech and Dan Hanaan's positive response would you introduce a story that in essence focuses on a pair of t***? Oh wait...
Looking forward to hearing Boris speak today, apparently he’s the first of half a dozen Cabinet members to do so, and his speech will be cleared properly with No.10 in advance.
More than anything it will be good to hear Cabinet members espousing positive visions for a post-Brexit Britain. Jacob Rees-Mogg and Dan Hannan are probably happy to be joined in their optimism by some of their more senior colleagues.
Opening report, how Remainers are betraying Britain. Doesn't sound like much of an olive branch or very positive.
A missed opportunity if so. A shame.
@AlastairMeeks is slightly misrepresenting the story (although he reflects the headline) - @CarlottaVance has posted the text a couple of times
Johnson says that *if* there is a successful attempt to prevent Brexit that *will be* regarded as a betrayal
It suits Remoaners to identify Brexit with right wing nationalistic racist Little Englanders, and of course some Brexiteers are like that.
But let us not forget that Brexit was supported across the political spectrum, and that many on the left supported it too. Tony Benn was a passionate leaver on democratic and economic grounds. His disciple Jeremy Corbyn has voted against every EU treaty for 30 years (and refused to campaign efectively for Remain int he referendum). Dennis Skinner the left wing Labour MP voted Brexit. Frank Field, John Mann, Gisela Stuart..... One of our most left wing trade unions the RMT campaigned for Leave. 52% of voters from all political persuasions voted for Brexit.
Remoaners (that tiny minority of Remainers) try to paint all Leavers as right wing racists and nationalists.
Not so. I have voted Labour all my life, and voted Leave.
Yes I was quite surprised to see people starting to refer to europhiles as left wing during the referendum campaign. I've always associated being anti-EU with the left. I thought it was quite interesting how left wing the policies coming out of the UKIP conference were during the brief period when they had a lot of members.
Boris is pitching for the Tory leadership. That is the only way to view this speech. It is the only way to view his political career. And a lot of Tories like his buccaneering English nationalism with its ceaseless, sly digs at foreigners. I would not bet against him being successful and then being the third abysmal Tory PM in a row!
Why would I axe grind against the English? I am English and know that buccaneering Tory English nationalism is not a majority view in the country where I was born and brought up.
I just said the reasons in the post you responded to.
But George Orwell comes to mind: "England is the only great country in the world whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality."
While it is flattering to be considered an intellectual, I doubt many people who know me would confuse me with one :-D
I am not ashamed to be English. I just deeply dislike right wing, Tory English nationalism. I do not believe that the Tory right owns English identity, culture or history.
Your third post on the topic and you just reassert the claim. I voted Labour in every election in my adult life until the last one but even I can see Tories are British in their nationalism/patriotism. It's Rule Britannia and Land of Hope and Glory they love at the Proms. You just reassert this English nationalist accusation to stir division. It is ugly.
I disagree, I think a lot of right wing Tories - including Johnson and Rees Moog - equate Britishness with Englishness. I think you can see this, for example, in their complete inability to take the Irish border issue seriously. Of course, the third song that is always sung loudly and lustily at the Proms is Jerusalem.
For your only actual justification for the English nationalist claim, that's incredibly weak. For a start British identity existed for almost a century before Ireland was annexed.
And which Jerusalem are you talking about? The one that's the unofficial anthem of the Labour Party? That one?
That is not my only justification, it's just the one I mentioned. Historically, the way that England and Britain are used interchangeably by a certain kind of right wing politician in speeches and in writings leads me to believe that they equate the two. It is certainly a common complaint made in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. I think British identity is something very different to English identity.
That is not my only justification, it's just the one I mentioned. Historically, the way that England and Britain are used interchangeably by a certain kind of right wing politician in speeches and in writings leads me to believe that they equate the two. It is certainly a common complaint made in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. I think British identity is something very different to English identity.
Boris Johnson quoted JS Mill on nationalism in his speech. This is a man who described the Welsh and Scottish Highlanders as an "inferior and more backward portion of the human race".
That is not my only justification, it's just the one I mentioned. Historically, the way that England and Britain are used interchangeably by a certain kind of right wing politician in speeches and in writings leads me to believe that they equate the two. It is certainly a common complaint made in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. I think British identity is something very different to English identity.
Boris Johnson quoted JS Mill on nationalism in his speech. This is a man who described the Welsh and Scottish Highlanders as an "inferior and more backward portion of the human race".
Boris is pitching for the Tory leadership. That is the only way to view this speech. It is the only !
Why would I axe grind against the English? I am English and know that buccaneering Tory English nationalism is not a majority view in the country where I was born and brought up.
I just said the reasons in the post you responded to.
But George Orwell comes to mind: "England is the only great country in the world whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality."
While it is flattering to be considered an intellectual, I doubt many people who know me would confuse me with one :-D
I am not ashamed to be English. I just deeply dislike right wing, Tory English nationalism. I do not believe that the Tory right owns English identity, culture or history.
Your third post on the topic and you just reassert the claim. I voted Labour in every eis ugly.
I disagree, I think a lot of right wing Tories - including Johnson and Rees Moog -
For your only actual justification for the English nationalist claim, that's incredibly weak. For a start British identity existed for almost a century before Ireland was annexed.
And which Jerusalem are you talking about? The one that's the unofficial anthem of the Labour Party? That one?
That is not my only justification, it's just the one I mentioned. Historically, the way that England and Britain are used interchangeably by a certain kind of right wing politician in speeches and in writings leads me to believe that they equate the two. It is certainly a common complaint made in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. I think British identity is something very different to English identity.
Personally I think we should have a British anthem (for the Olympics), English, Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish anthems and a Royal anthem played in the presence of a member of the royal family (which could still be 'God Save the Queen'.)
Having 'God Save the Queen' played at England rugby union and football and cricket matches against Scotland, Wales, Australia and New Zealand is absurd when the anthem could apply equally to England's opponents. Why not adopt 'Land of Hope and Glory' or 'Jerusalem' which have both been used as the English anthem at the Commonwealth Games?
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
Surely joining the EU weakened our case to retain the UNSC ?
No, as part of the EU, when we spoke in the UNSC it was on behalf of the second largest bloc in the world. In general other countries would know that they would have to treat the UK with a certain level of respect because we were one of the lead nations in the EU and would help shape the EU's attitude.
Its similar to how Ireland has been able to bully the UK in regards to the Irish border - you've got a lot of sovereignty when 26 other countries have your back.
That is not my only justification, it's just the one I mentioned. Historically, the way that England and Britain are used interchangeably by a certain kind of right wing politician in speeches and in writings leads me to believe that they equate the two. It is certainly a common complaint made in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. I think British identity is something very different to English identity.
Boris Johnson quoted JS Mill on nationalism in his speech. This is a man who described the Welsh and Scottish Highlanders as an "inferior and more backward portion of the human race".
BoJo said that about the Highlanders?!?!?!?!?
Mill did, in Considerations on Representative Government, which I think is the work Johnson was quoting from today.
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
Surely joining the EU weakened our case to retain the UNSC ?
No, as part of the EU, when we spoke in the UNSC it was on behalf of the second largest bloc in the world. In general other countries would know that they would have to treat the UK with a certain level of respect because we were one of the lead nations in the EU and would help shape the EU's attitude.
Its similar to how Ireland has been able to bully the UK in regards to the Irish border - you've got a lot of sovereignty when 26 other countries have your back.
Why hasn't the UN requested the EU join the UNSC ?
Could then kick the Uk and France out and get Saudi or Brazil in.
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
Surely joining the EU weakened our case to retain the UNSC ?
No, as part of the EU, when we spoke in the UNSC it was on behalf of the second largest bloc in the world. In general other countries would know that they would have to treat the UK with a certain level of respect because we were one of the lead nations in the EU and would help shape the EU's attitude.
Its similar to how Ireland has been able to bully the UK in regards to the Irish border - you've got a lot of sovereignty when 26 other countries have your back.
Why hasn't the UN requested the EU join the UNSC ?
Could then kick the Uk and France out and get Saudi or Brazil in.
Or Japan or India (though Pakistan would complain) and Iran would oppose Saudi membership. Had we stayed in the EU we may eventually have lost our UNSC seat to the EU
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
Surely joining the EU weakened our case to retain the UNSC ?
No, as part of the EU, when we spoke in the UNSC it was on behalf of the second largest bloc in the world. In general other countries would know that they would have to treat the UK with a certain level of respect because we were one of the lead nations in the EU and would help shape the EU's attitude.
Its similar to how Ireland has been able to bully the UK in regards to the Irish border - you've got a lot of sovereignty when 26 other countries have your back.
Amazing that this simple, transparent truth should be so difficult for Brexiters to grasp.
The Guardian has grabbed the token issues in its headline but the proposals on farm subsidies are a very major step, developing further the approach proposed by Gove, and some of the rest is substantial too. It's great to see a cross-party consensus emerging on much of this.
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
The section on the UK's geo-strategic position didn't work even without the rest. His reassurance about the UK's position consisted of saying that the UK remains committed to the same alliances. Surely that simply highlights the weakness of our geo-strategic position and our limited freedom of manoeuvre.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
Surely joining the EU weakened our case to retain the UNSC ?
No, as part of the EU, when we spoke in the UNSC it was on behalf of the second largest bloc in the world. In general other countries would know that they would have to treat the UK with a certain level of respect because we were one of the lead nations in the EU and would help shape the EU's attitude.
Its similar to how Ireland has been able to bully the UK in regards to the Irish border - you've got a lot of sovereignty when 26 other countries have your back.
Yes, you don't mess with the Armed Forces of Malta.
I don't think, however, that he addressed them well. He tried to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds: he can't be a joker nudge-nudge talking about the antics of Brits in Thailand on the one hand, and allay peoples' fears about the UK's geo-strategic position on the other, all in the same speech.
.
The Tories simply cannot face up to the geo-political consequences of Brexit, which imply a more detached and neutral stance more akin to Norway or Switzerland's. A shame, really, since we could save a fortune on white elephants like Trident and doomed overseas military intervention, and our respected soft power, diplomatic expertise and foreign aid programme equip us well to carry out a more benign role on the world stage.
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council unlike Norway or Switzerland and a member of NATO unlike Switzerland we still play a role in international interventions overseas despite Brexit
I expect Brexit will weaken our case to retain the UNSC. And take a look at the contributions various NATO members (like Norway) made to the Iraq "coalition" - handfuls of mine clearance experts, engineers, or expertise in other areas of logistics. We could do that.
Surely joining the EU weakened our case to retain the UNSC ?
No, as part of the EU, when we spoke in the UNSC it was on behalf of the second largest bloc in the world. In general other countries would know that they would have to treat the UK with a certain level of respect because we were one of the lead nations in the EU and would help shape the EU's attitude.
Its similar to how Ireland has been able to bully the UK in regards to the Irish border - you've got a lot of sovereignty when 26 other countries have your back.
Amazing that this simple, transparent truth should be so difficult for Brexiters to grasp.
I wonder if they don't grasp or don't care? Having global influence is remote from most people's daily experience. The only people who will be affected by our reduced geo-political standing will be politicians, who no longer get to be POTUS's first telephone call or centre stage at the next photo call. Indeed my bigger worry would be that our reduced global standing affects our economic performance as companies no longer base themselves in the UK but in mainland Europe where they can lobby the governments more effectively.
The Guardian has grabbed the token issues in its headline but the proposals on farm subsidies are a very major step, developing further the approach proposed by Gove, and some of the rest is substantial too. It's great to see a cross-party consensus emerging on much of this.
"The majority of tenancy agreements prohibit the owning of pets without explicit permission from a landlords"
Is this a proposal you are familiar with? I think it's nonsense, at least as an animal protection measure.
Comments
Hell I voted remain but I agree it would be a betrayal.
The actual speech, not all the fluff and reaction to it is what I want to look at.
https://twitter.com/EveningStandard/status/963744546302709761
I haven't read or seen Boris's speech yet, and have no opinion on it, but I'd expect a much higher form of analysis on this site.
Good luck if Europhiles wish to pursue that one.
https://twitter.com/katehoeymp/status/963757899548905472
Wish it away...
Norway makes a NATO contribution proportionate to its size
It is a bloody dirge.
'And did those feet in ancient time' was the original QTWTAIN.
Give England its own and decent national anthem, not fecking Jerusalem.
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/963735953708896256
And which Jerusalem are you talking about? The one that's the unofficial anthem of the Labour Party? That one?
Johnson says that *if* there is a successful attempt to prevent Brexit that *will be* regarded as a betrayal
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/963758619832606721
https://mobile.twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/963748452290256897
And was Jerusalem builded here,
Among these dark Satanic Mills?
obv not, because the job still needs doing ("till we have built Jerusalem") in the final stanza.
I have always liked the theory that the dark Satanic Mills are the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.
Having 'God Save the Queen' played at England rugby union and football and cricket matches against Scotland, Wales, Australia and New Zealand is absurd when the anthem could apply equally to England's opponents. Why not adopt 'Land of Hope and Glory' or 'Jerusalem' which have both been used as the English anthem at the Commonwealth Games?
Its similar to how Ireland has been able to bully the UK in regards to the Irish border - you've got a lot of sovereignty when 26 other countries have your back.
https://twitter.com/DMcCaffreySKY/status/963746275119247361
https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/m/mill/john_stuart/m645r/chapter16.html
Could then kick the Uk and France out and get Saudi or Brazil in.
NEW THREAD
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/14/foie-gras-and-badger-culling-would-be-banned-under-labour-proposals
The Guardian has grabbed the token issues in its headline but the proposals on farm subsidies are a very major step, developing further the approach proposed by Gove, and some of the rest is substantial too. It's great to see a cross-party consensus emerging on much of this.
Is this a proposal you are familiar with? I think it's nonsense, at least as an animal protection measure.