Russia was remarkably altruistic in pressing the case for Brexit, which all our resident Leavers assure us had nothing to do with the Russians' sudden brazenness in Britain:
Russia was remarkably altruistic in pressing the case for Brexit, which all our resident Leavers assure us had nothing to do with the Russians' sudden brazenness in Britain:
The idea people and parties will go easy on the government over Brexit because of this is pretty risible, so as a motivation it fails a basic test of plausibility.
We chose ...to change the emphasis of our outlook away from a Euro-centric to a more global oriented world view.
Much as I would like to think that Brexit will mean a more global outlook, I can't help fearing that it will not, and I don't share your certainty that Leavers voted for one, at least in part. The Eurocentric view which you describe wasn't caused by the EU and won't be cured by leaving it. It requires the desire to know more and most people can't do that, due to temperament, finances, language barriers, etc.
Consider Iain Duncan Smith. Unlike some of his colleagues he does not cultivate stupidity or mistake style for substance. And although his managerial ability is lacking, his ability to see a problem, (welfare dependence), identify a solution (benefit reform) and prosecute it is good. So he's not actually dumb in the way that, say, Bojo is. But some of his comments during Brexit (he made a remark along the lines of "who knew this Irish thing would become so important", but not in those words) were very stupid indeed.
This is because his view of the world and history are constrained by his class, age, finances, preconceptions and language. And it is very difficult to escape those bonds. Multiply that by millions and you get the reason why the global view you propound will not IMHO happen except where it fits existing preconceptions like Commonwealth or CANZUK.
Russia was remarkably altruistic in pressing the case for Brexit, which all our resident Leavers assure us had nothing to do with the Russians' sudden brazenness in Britain:
Yeah, it is a cold war. The difference between this cold war and the cold war of Soviet era is that this cold war is much more covert and deceptive. Without looking closer, it might be a bit difficult to see that Russia is not a friendly power, especially if you listen to the words they are - or, at least, were until the Ukrainian war - espousing.
But as the saying goes, actions speak louder than words. Cyber attacks in Estonia in 2005, the aggression against Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014. The involvement in the US Presidential Elections in 2016. The actions are clear.
No, I don't. "Kyle Knox" is a pseudoname, not my real name (I want to keep my real life away from my blogging and Kyle Knox has a good sound to it).
“Tom Knox” is the pen name of some Cornish chick who posts on here occasionally...
Ohh... I did not know that.
We are in no way related...
She’s written a couple of okay books - the Ice Twins and the Fire Child I think
An exceptional woman in many ways. Married to a much-younger woman - it's legal in the UK - she has pursued a literary career despite her physiology and with some success. No doubt she will fill in the details when she logs on.
We chose ...to change the emphasis of our outlook away from a Euro-centric to a more global oriented world view.
Much as I would like to think that Brexit will mean a more global outlook, I can't help fearing that it will not, and I don't share your certainty that Leavers voted for one, at least in part. The Eurocentric view which you describe wasn't caused by the EU and won't be cured by leaving it. It requires the desire to know more and most people can't do that, due to temperament, finances, language barriers, etc.
Consider Iain Duncan Smith. Unlike some of his colleagues he does not cultivate stupidity or mistake style for substance. And although his managerial ability is lacking, his ability to see a problem, (welfare dependence), identify a solution (benefit reform) and prosecute it is good. So he's not actually dumb in the way that, say, Bojo is. But some of his comments during Brexit (he made a remark along the lines of "who knew this Irish thing would become so important", but not in those words) were very stupid indeed.
This is because his view of the world and history are constrained by his class, age, finances, preconceptions and language. And it is very difficult to escape those bonds. Multiply that by millions and you get the reason why the global view you propound will not IMHO happen except where it fits existing preconceptions like Commonwealth or CANZUK.
There are worse places to start than the Commonwealth and CANZUK especially. In a few years I think a deal between the Five Eyes nations ought to be achievable and fits within the paradigms you mentioned.
We chose ...to change the emphasis of our outlook away from a Euro-centric to a more global oriented world view.
Much as I would like to think that Brexit will mean a more global outlook, I can't help fearing that it will not, and I don't share your certainty that Leavers voted for one, at least in part. The Eurocentric view which you describe wasn't caused by the EU and won't be cured by leaving it. It requires the desire to know more and most people can't do that, due to temperament, finances, language barriers, etc.
Consider Iain Duncan Smith. Unlike some of his colleagues he does not cultivate stupidity or mistake style for substance. And although his managerial ability is lacking, his ability to see a problem, (welfare dependence), identify a solution (benefit reform) and prosecute it is good. So he's not actually dumb in the way that, say, Bojo is. But some of his comments during Brexit (he made a remark along the lines of "who knew this Irish thing would become so important", but not in those words) were very stupid indeed.
This is because his view of the world and history are constrained by his class, age, finances, preconceptions and language. And it is very difficult to escape those bonds. Multiply that by millions and you get the reason why the global view you propound will not IMHO happen except where it fits existing preconceptions like Commonwealth or CANZUK.
There are worse places to start than the Commonwealth and CANZUK especially. In a few years I think a deal between the Five Eyes nations ought to be achievable and fits within the paradigms you mentioned.
We chose ...to change the emphasis of our outlook away from a Euro-centric to a more global oriented world view.
Much as I would like to think that Brexit will mean a more global outlook, I can't help fearing that it will not, and I don't share your certainty that Leavers voted for one, at least in part. The Eurocentric view which you describe wasn't caused by the EU and won't be cured by leaving it. It requires the desire to know more and most people can't do that, due to temperament, finances, language barriers, etc.
Consider Iain Duncan Smith. Unlike some of his colleagues he does not cultivate stupidity or mistake style for substance. And although his managerial ability is lacking, his ability to see a problem, (welfare dependence), identify a solution (benefit reform) and prosecute it is good. So he's not actually dumb in the way that, say, Bojo is. But some of his comments during Brexit (he made a remark along the lines of "who knew this Irish thing would become so important", but not in those words) were very stupid indeed.
This is because his view of the world and history are constrained by his class, age, finances, preconceptions and language. And it is very difficult to escape those bonds. Multiply that by millions and you get the reason why the global view you propound will not IMHO happen except where it fits existing preconceptions like Commonwealth or CANZUK.
There are worse places to start than the Commonwealth and CANZUK especially. In a few years I think a deal between the Five Eyes nations ought to be achievable and fits within the paradigms you mentioned.
We chose ...to change the emphasis of our outlook away from a Euro-centric to a more global oriented world view.
Much as I would like to think that Brexit will mean a more global outlook, I can't help fearing that it will not, and I don't share your certainty that Leavers voted for one, at least in part. The Eurocentric view which you describe wasn't caused by the EU and won't be cured by leaving it. It requires the desire to know more and most people can't do that, due to temperament, finances, language barriers, etc.
Consider Iain Duncan Smith. Unlike some of his colleagues he does not cultivate stupidity or mistake style for substance. And although his managerial ability is lacking, his ability to see a problem, (welfare dependence), identify a solution (benefit reform) and prosecute it is good. So he's not actually dumb in the way that, say, Bojo is. But some of his comments during Brexit (he made a remark along the lines of "who knew this Irish thing would become so important", but not in those words) were very stupid indeed.
This is because his view of the world and history are constrained by his class, age, finances, preconceptions and language. And it is very difficult to escape those bonds. Multiply that by millions and you get the reason why the global view you propound will not IMHO happen except where it fits existing preconceptions like Commonwealth or CANZUK.
There are worse places to start than the Commonwealth and CANZUK especially. In a few years I think a deal between the Five Eyes nations ought to be achievable and fits within the paradigms you mentioned.
What kind of deal?
I would like one like TPP.
There’s nothing to stop the EU joining a deal like the TPP.
In the People's Party, accusations (which appear to be entirely false) of photoshopping a hat on on the Supreme Leader seems to have caused more consternation than the use of chemical weaponry on UK soil: https://twitter.com/jessbrammar/status/975039991024963584
Yeah, it is a cold war. The difference between this cold war and the cold war of Soviet era is that this cold war is much more covert and deceptive. Without looking closer, it might be a bit difficult to see that Russia is not a friendly power, especially if you listen to the words they are - or, at least, were until the Ukrainian war - espousing.
But as the saying goes, actions speak louder than words. Cyber attacks in Estonia in 2005, the aggression against Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014. The involvement in the US Presidential Elections in 2016. The actions are clear.
No, I don't. "Kyle Knox" is a pseudoname, not my real name (I want to keep my real life away from my blogging and Kyle Knox has a good sound to it).
“Tom Knox” is the pen name of some Cornish chick who posts on here occasionally...
Ohh... I did not know that.
We are in no way related...
She’s written a couple of okay books - the Ice Twins and the Fire Child I think
An exceptional woman in many ways. Married to a much-younger woman - it's legal in the UK - she has pursued a literary career despite her physiology and with some success. No doubt she will fill in the details when she logs on.
Comments
Consider Iain Duncan Smith. Unlike some of his colleagues he does not cultivate stupidity or mistake style for substance. And although his managerial ability is lacking, his ability to see a problem, (welfare dependence), identify a solution (benefit reform) and prosecute it is good. So he's not actually dumb in the way that, say, Bojo is. But some of his comments during Brexit (he made a remark along the lines of "who knew this Irish thing would become so important", but not in those words) were very stupid indeed.
This is because his view of the world and history are constrained by his class, age, finances, preconceptions and language. And it is very difficult to escape those bonds. Multiply that by millions and you get the reason why the global view you propound will not IMHO happen except where it fits existing preconceptions like Commonwealth or CANZUK.
Oh, and Happy St Patrick’s Day.
Come on Ireland!
https://twitter.com/jessbrammar/status/975039991024963584