Voters in the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia are voting today on whether to become independent from France but polls suggest they will reject independence
At least if they do it will mean there are more yellow bellies other than the Scots.
I imagine that it must really irk many SNPers that their Scottish compatriots were "yellow bellied" but that 2 years later their English compatriots were not.
Though whether the fudged Brexit May is concocting today which will keep the whole UK in a Customs Union is really 'independence' is debateable, judging by their tweets this morning many Brexiteers do not think so
Tough. Where’s their viable and possible alternative?
Leave the Single Market and Customs Union and 'chuck Chequers' and go to WTO terms and No Deal if necessary is certainly the position of Mogg, the ERG, 'Leave means Leave', UKIP and hardline Brexiteers
Voters in the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia are voting today on whether to become independent from France but polls suggest they will reject independence
At least if they do it will mean there are more yellow bellies other than the Scots.
The New Caledonians also have representation in the French National Assembly as Recidivist pointed out.
Though if the New Caledonians join the Scots and Quebecois as 'yellow bellies' having rejected independence in a referendum rather ironic that the only voters recently to vote for independence are the Catalonians, even if in only an unofficial referendum
Voters in the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia are voting today on whether to become independent from France but polls suggest they will reject independence
At least if they do it will mean there are more yellow bellies other than the Scots.
The New Caledonians also have representation in the French National Assembly as Recidivist pointed out.
Though if the New Caledonians join the Scots and Quebecois as 'yellow bellies' having rejected independence in a referendum rather ironic that the only voters recently to vote for independence are the Catalonians, even if in only an unofficial referendum
But the Quebecois did vote for independence,
Battu par l’argent et le vote ethnique.
The falling away of Quebecois independence parties remains surprising, given that they were so close in 1995.
Ethnic French speaking Quebecois voted for independence but not Quebecois as a whole who voted to stay part of Canada. Arguably 50% of native born Scots voted for independence in 2014 too but not Scots as a whole.
After 2 defeated independence referendums most Quebecois are now focused on domestic issues
While some interviews are so weak her criticism in this particular case may be valid (I have not seen it myself), I think Burley does make a reasonable point as it applies generally, particularly when people are criticising in advance. Cadwalladr has also had to admit to plenty of mistakes, so may not be the best person to be making criticisms.
Voters in the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia are voting today on whether to become independent from France but polls suggest they will reject independence
At least if they do it will mean there are more yellow bellies other than the Scots.
I imagine that it must really irk many SNPers that their Scottish compatriots were "yellow bellied" but that 2 years later their English compatriots were not.
Though whether the fudged Brexit May is concocting today which will keep the whole UK in a Customs Union is really 'independence' is debateable, judging by their tweets this morning many Brexiteers do not think so
Tough. Where’s their viable and possible alternative?
Leave the Single Market and Customs Union and 'chuck Chequers' and go to WTO terms and No Deal if necessary is certainly the position of Mogg, the ERG, 'Leave means Leave', UKIP and hardline Brexiteers
Viable? Possible?
I’d like to go back to being 20 again and trying to get into a certain blonde’s knickers, but it’s just about as likely as WTO and No Deal.
Voters in the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia are voting today on whether to become independent from France but polls suggest they will reject independence
At least if they do it will mean there are more yellow bellies other than the Scots.
I imagine that it must really irk many SNPers that their Scottish compatriots were "yellow bellied" but that 2 years later their English compatriots were not.
Though whether the fudged Brexit May is concocting today which will keep the whole UK in a Customs Union is really 'independence' is debateable, judging by their tweets this morning many Brexiteers do not think so
Voters in the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia are voting today on whether to become independent from France but polls suggest they will reject independence
At least if they do it will mean there are more yellow bellies other than the Scots.
I imagine that it must really irk many SNPers that their Scottish compatriots were "yellow bellied" but that 2 years later their English compatriots were not.
Though whether the fudged Brexit May is concocting today which will keep the whole UK in a Customs Union is really 'independence' is debateable, judging by their tweets this morning many Brexiteers do not think so
Tough. Where’s their viable and possible alternative?
Leave the Single Market and Customs Union and 'chuck Chequers' and go to WTO terms and No Deal if necessary is certainly the position of Mogg, the ERG, 'Leave means Leave', UKIP and hardline Brexiteers
Viable? Possible?
I’d like to go back to being 20 again and trying to get into a certain blonde’s knickers, but it’s just about as likely as WTO and No Deal.
Viable or Not that is what 'Leave means Leave' Brexiteers see as the only proper Brexit
Voters in the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia are voting today on whether to become independent from France but polls suggest they will reject independence
At least if they do it will mean there are more yellow bellies other than the Scots.
I imagine that it must really irk many SNPers that their Scottish compatriots were "yellow bellied" but that 2 years later their English compatriots were not.
Though whether the fudged Brexit May is concocting today which will keep the whole UK in a Customs Union is really 'independence' is debateable, judging by their tweets this morning many Brexiteers do not think so
Tough. Where’s their viable and possible alternative?
Leave the Single Market and Customs Union and 'chuck Chequers' and go to WTO terms and No Deal if necessary is certainly the position of Mogg, the ERG, 'Leave means Leave', UKIP and hardline Brexiteers
Viable? Possible?
I’d like to go back to being 20 again and trying to get into a certain blonde’s knickers, but it’s just about as likely as WTO and No Deal.
Viable or Not that is what 'Leave means Leave' Brexiteers see as the only proper Brexit
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
While some interviews are so weak her criticism in this particular case may be valid (I have not seen it myself), I think Burley does make a reasonable point as it applies generally, particularly when people are criticising in advance. Cadwalladr has also had to admit to plenty of mistakes, so may not be the best person to be making criticisms.
I don't agree with Burley. How often has a political interviewer actually gotten new information that the interviewee didn't intend to give, as a result of asking the right questions?
Political interviews are a form of theatre. Sometimes a particularly hapless or unlucky interviewee will have a "car crash", which keeps things exciting, but generally it's just a platform for somebody to say whatever they want, with a sprinkle of deflection to acknowledge the question they were asked.
While some interviews are so weak her criticism in this particular case may be valid (I have not seen it myself), I think Burley does make a reasonable point as it applies generally, particularly when people are criticising in advance. Cadwalladr has also had to admit to plenty of mistakes, so may not be the best person to be making criticisms.
I don't agree with Burley. How often has a political interviewer actually gotten new information that the interviewee didn't intend to give, as a result of asking the right questions?
Political interviews are a form of theatre. Sometimes a particularly hapless or unlucky interviewee will have a "car crash", which keeps things exciting, but generally it's just a platform for somebody to say whatever they want, with a sprinkle of deflection to acknowledge the question they were asked.
So what should we have instead? Literally just statements from politicians without even an attempt to finagle more detail out of them, or explore their positions more?
Good interviewing is hard, and politicians naturally fight hard to avoid being pinned down or to answer difficult questions. That doesn't mean it is pointless, since not doing them seems like giving up and we should just have nothing but unadulterated spin from all sides and not even bother trying to question them.
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Labour is still perceived, in many minds I suspect, as the old alliance between Methodism and Marx. Marx may be in the ascendance in the centre, but on the periphery the old alliance still holds, and there’s a tradition of pride in Britishness, which was corrupted by the deceptive actions of Leave into a belief that it was ‘patriotic’ to vote against Brussels.
Under the terms of a 1998 deal, a No vote result on Sunday may not spell the end of the independence drive. Two further referendums on independence can still be held before 2022.
Under the terms of a 1998 deal, a No vote result on Sunday may not spell the end of the independence drive. Two further referendums on independence can still be held before 2022.
Oh goody for them.
Looks like the New Caledonian cybernats may be back again then
While some interviews are so weak her criticism in this particular case may be valid (I have not seen it myself), I think Burley does make a reasonable point as it applies generally, particularly when people are criticising in advance. Cadwalladr has also had to admit to plenty of mistakes, so may not be the best person to be making criticisms.
I don't agree with Burley. How often has a political interviewer actually gotten new information that the interviewee didn't intend to give, as a result of asking the right questions?
Political interviews are a form of theatre. Sometimes a particularly hapless or unlucky interviewee will have a "car crash", which keeps things exciting, but generally it's just a platform for somebody to say whatever they want, with a sprinkle of deflection to acknowledge the question they were asked.
So what should we have instead? Literally just statements from politicians without even an attempt to finagle more detail out of them, or explore their positions more?
Good interviewing is hard, and politicians naturally fight hard to avoid being pinned down or to answer difficult questions. That doesn't mean it is pointless, since not doing them seems like giving up and we should just have nothing but unadulterated spin from all sides and not even bother trying to question them.
You may not even be suggesting it, but I have a problem with Banks being described as a politician; I think that it should be reserved for those who have at least put themselves to the inconvenience of getting people to vote for them. Much as I despise them, Farage and Griffin are/were politicians, Banks is not.
While some interviews are so weak her criticism in this particular case may be valid (I have not seen it myself), I think Burley does make a reasonable point as it applies generally, particularly when people are criticising in advance. Cadwalladr has also had to admit to plenty of mistakes, so may not be the best person to be making criticisms.
I don't agree with Burley. How often has a political interviewer actually gotten new information that the interviewee didn't intend to give, as a result of asking the right questions?
Political interviews are a form of theatre. Sometimes a particularly hapless or unlucky interviewee will have a "car crash", which keeps things exciting, but generally it's just a platform for somebody to say whatever they want, with a sprinkle of deflection to acknowledge the question they were asked.
So what should we have instead? Literally just statements from politicians without even an attempt to finagle more detail out of them, or explore their positions more?
Good interviewing is hard, and politicians naturally fight hard to avoid being pinned down or to answer difficult questions. That doesn't mean it is pointless, since not doing them seems like giving up and we should just have nothing but unadulterated spin from all sides and not even bother trying to question them.
You may not even be suggesting it, but I have a problem with Banks being described as a politician; I think that it should be reserved for those who have at least put themselves to the inconvenience of getting people to vote for them. Much as I despise them, Farage and Griffin are/were politicians, Banks is not.
He is, however, involved in political issues in a way a lot of mere doners are not. If anything that he is not really a politician should make it an even better idea he is interviewed (given his involvement in politics) as the chances of him truly being tested in an interview should be higher, if it is done right. And since he can say all manner of things without even the briefest or superficial challenge in a great many places, the opportunity (even if not taken up well by the interviewer) to have that challenge to what he says seems worth the risk that an interviewer might do a poor job.
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
The British media only have about 3 story templates about things happening in the rest of Europe, if you can't somehow wedge it into one of those then it didn't happen.
While some interviews are so weak her criticism in this particular case may be valid (I have not seen it myself), I think Burley does make a reasonable point as it applies generally, particularly when people are criticising in advance. Cadwalladr has also had to admit to plenty of mistakes, so may not be the best person to be making criticisms.
I don't agree with Burley. How often has a political interviewer actually gotten new information that the interviewee didn't intend to give, as a result of asking the right questions?
Political interviews are a form of theatre. Sometimes a particularly hapless or unlucky interviewee will have a "car crash", which keeps things exciting, but generally it's just a platform for somebody to say whatever they want, with a sprinkle of deflection to acknowledge the question they were asked.
So what should we have instead? Literally just statements from politicians without even an attempt to finagle more detail out of them, or explore their positions more?
Good interviewing is hard, and politicians naturally fight hard to avoid being pinned down or to answer difficult questions. That doesn't mean it is pointless, since not doing them seems like giving up and we should just have nothing but unadulterated spin from all sides and not even bother trying to question them.
You may not even be suggesting it, but I have a problem with Banks being described as a politician; I think that it should be reserved for those who have at least put themselves to the inconvenience of getting people to vote for them. Much as I despise them, Farage and Griffin are/were politicians, Banks is not.
He is, however, involved in political issues in a way a lot of mere doners are not.
While some interviews are so weak her criticism in this particular case may be valid (I have not seen it myself), I think Burley does make a reasonable point as it applies generally, particularly when people are criticising in advance. Cadwalladr has also had to admit to plenty of mistakes, so may not be the best person to be making criticisms.
I don't agree with Burley. How often has a political interviewer actually gotten new information that the interviewee didn't intend to give, as a result of asking the right questions?
Political interviews are a form of theatre. Sometimes a particularly hapless or unlucky interviewee will have a "car crash", which keeps things exciting, but generally it's just a platform for somebody to say whatever they want, with a sprinkle of deflection to acknowledge the question they were asked.
So what should we have instead? Literally just statements from politicians without even an attempt to finagle more detail out of them, or explore their positions more?
Good interviewing is hard, and politicians naturally fight hard to avoid being pinned down or to answer difficult questions. That doesn't mean it is pointless, since not doing them seems like giving up and we should just have nothing but unadulterated spin from all sides and not even bother trying to question them.
You may not even be suggesting it, but I have a problem with Banks being described as a politician; I think that it should be reserved for those who have at least put themselves to the inconvenience of getting people to vote for them. Much as I despise them, Farage and Griffin are/were politicians, Banks is not.
He is, however, involved in political issues in a way a lot of mere doners are not.
The British media only have about 3 story templates about things happening in the rest of Europe, if you can't somehow wedge it into one of those then it didn't happen.
Banks answered several times - Rock Services (a UK company of his) was the company which generated and provided the cash.
If he is lying and the cash came from abroad presumably the police will tell us.
Andrew Marr ignored the answers and just talked over Banks, which led to the interview being rather chaotic rather than forensic.
Apparently Banks told MPs that Rock Services only passed the money on to Leave.EU. Banks refused to tell Marr who supplied the money to Rock Services. I think Marr did OK given Banks is clearly obfuscating. There's no lineage for this money.
Edit Rock Services made a £316 000 operating loss on £40 million insurance business. It seems unlikely to support a £8 million loan
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
My impression from a fleeting visit during the Bavarian elections is that Merkel is suffering strong counter-reactions to both left and right, immigration having polarised politics to the disadvantage of both moderate left and moderate right. No different from the polarisatjon going on almost everywhere
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
The movement to the Greens has been biggest from SPD voters, CDU/CSU+ AfD still polls higher than SPD + Greens
New Caledonia is an interesting spot. I had a few days stopover there on the way back from NZ in 1990. In practice, Noumea is like a small French town, albeit one with more visible minorities, the countryside nearly completely Kanak. Interestingly the Kanaks play cricket, albeit a bit unconventionally! The Kanaks and Noumea each have considerable autonomy in local government that allows it to work.
It was a very pleasant bit of backpacking, until we caught the airport bus for the flight onwards on a Friday evening. Mrs Foxy and I were the only white people on the bus, and the only sober passangers, as the remainder were all Kanaks having drunk their mining wages and heading home for the weekend up the coast in their villages. The hostility was palpable, and we were a bit intimidated. After a couple of miles, a drunk fell off his seat. I checked he was ok, and his companion slurred at me in French. I replied that my French was limited, Je suis Anglais!
Instantly, the atmosphere changed. Once they knew we were not French settlers it was a different ride, with smiles, drinks and food being pressed on us. At the airport we were waved off the bus. Unfortunately as the bus pulled away we found that the airport was locked and closed, but that is another travel anecdote.
Is the 2nd article on this page right? It says we will not be leaving EEA next year, because we have not done the legal procedure to leave i.e. not automatic on leaving EU
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
Aren't they surging because of the SDP being crap?
New Caledonia is an interesting spot. I had a few days stopover there on the way back from NZ in 1990. In practice, Noumea is like a small French town, albeit one with more visible minorities, the countryside nearly completely Kanak. Interestingly the Kanaks play cricket, albeit a bit unconventionally! The Kanaks and Noumea each have considerable autonomy in local government that allows it to work.
It was a very pleasant bit of backpacking, until we caught the airport bus for the flight onwards on a Friday evening. Mrs Foxy and I were the only white people on the bus, and the only sober passangers, as the remainder were all Kanaks having drunk their mining wages and heading home for the weekend up the coast in their villages. The hostility was palpable, and we were a bit intimidated. After a couple of miles, a drunk fell off his seat. I checked he was ok, and his companion slurred at me in French. I replied that my French was limited, Je suis Anglais!
Instantly, the atmosphere changed. Once they knew we were not French settlers it was a different ride, with smiles, drinks and food being pressed on us. At the airport we were waved off the bus. Unfortunately as the bus pulled away we found that the airport was locked and closed, but that is another travel anecdote.
Interesting anecdote.
Given about 27% of the New Caledonia population are ethnic Europeans their vote was probably key in defeating the independence vote
New Caledonia is an interesting spot. I had a few days stopover there on the way back from NZ in 1990. In practice, Noumea is like a small French town, albeit one with more visible minorities, the countryside nearly completely Kanak. Interestingly the Kanaks play cricket, albeit a bit unconventionally! The Kanaks and Noumea each have considerable autonomy in local government that allows it to work.
It was a very pleasant bit of backpacking, until we caught the airport bus for the flight onwards on a Friday evening. Mrs Foxy and I were the only white people on the bus, and the only sober passangers, as the remainder were all Kanaks having drunk their mining wages and heading home for the weekend up the coast in their villages. The hostility was palpable, and we were a bit intimidated. After a couple of miles, a drunk fell off his seat. I checked he was ok, and his companion slurred at me in French. I replied that my French was limited, Je suis Anglais!
Instantly, the atmosphere changed. Once they knew we were not French settlers it was a different ride, with smiles, drinks and food being pressed on us. At the airport we were waved off the bus. Unfortunately as the bus pulled away we found that the airport was locked and closed, but that is another travel anecdote.
Interesting anecdote.
Given about 27% of the New Caledonia population are ethnic Europeans their vote was probably key in defeating the independence vote
There is a big Polynesian minority too, Kanaks being Melanesian like PNG, so Kanaks are a minority overall.
We don't know yet if Banks' donation can ultimately traced back to the Russians, but he does seem to have taken lessons from them on how to obfuscate and create diversion from a simple question.
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
I thought the vast majority were refugees , who were forced to leave their country to escape war.
Merkel in my opinion is a leader to be admired. Germany as a country seems to me , to have more of a moral compass in the world. Than the UK presently has.
We don't know yet if Banks' donation can ultimately traced back to the Russians, but he does seem to have taken lessons from them on how to obfuscate and create diversion from a simple question.
Russians are the only ones who obfuscate etc.? I think have learnt that from just about anyone.
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
I thought the vast majority were refugees , who were forced to leave their country to escape war.
Merkel in my opinion is a leader to be admired. Germany as a country seems to me , to have more of a moral compass in the world. Than the UK presently has.
Whether it was a good moral decision or not does not relate to whether or not it was a good political decision. It was also one she took unilaterally, totally against the cooperative politics she often talks about. So whether it was an admirable decision or not is not really the issue, it's whether it has indeed caused her problems. It may be that the problems were worth taking that choice, but again that does not speak as to the existence of problems relating to the choice.
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
I thought the vast majority were refugees , who were forced to leave their country to escape war.
Merkel in my opinion is a leader to be admired. Germany as a country seems to me , to have more of a moral compass in the world. Than the UK presently has.
Na, the UK had the right approach of helping those most in need from the refugee camps.
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
Aren't they surging because of the SDP being crap?
SDP suffering from being junior party in a coalition. Where else have we seen that?
Increasingly world politics is uncomfortably reconfiguring between ethno-nationalists and those who see the values of their country more broadly, and comfortable engaging with the world outside.
We don't know yet if Banks' donation can ultimately traced back to the Russians, but he does seem to have taken lessons from them on how to obfuscate and create diversion from a simple question.
Russians are the only ones who obfuscate etc.? I think have learnt that from just about anyone.
As a modus operandi they've certainly elevated and refined it.
I do not know the detail with Banks but Marr comes over as hectoring and trying to talk over Banks. Pointless interview as far as I can see
Banks will forever be seen as the guy who bought Brexit, whether any criminal charges are brought and if so, succeed. He is HATED for that, without the need of a trial. Don't expect him to be treated with anything less than loathing by a Remain media.
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
Aren't they surging because of the SDP being crap?
SDP suffering from being junior party in a coalition. Where else have we seen that?
Not in Scotland where the Lib Dems increased their vote share whilst in coalition.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
I do not know the detail with Banks but Marr comes over as hectoring and trying to talk over Banks. Pointless interview as far as I can see
Banks will forever be seen as the guy who bought Brexit, whether any criminal charges are brought and if so, succeed. He is HATED for that, without the need of a trial. Don't expect him to be treated with anything less than loathing by a Remain media.
I don't understand Banks' agenda in getting himself interviewed on TV. He will have to account to the criminal investigators and potentially the courts for that money. He won't be able to brush them off like he did with Andrew Marr. Equally I am not sure it was a particularly wise interview for the BBC. It risks becoming part of the story in a criminal investigation.
He’s meant to be a journalist, isn’t he? Why doesn’t he do some in depth inquiry into German politics and come back and and tell us rather than asking simple-minded questions based on questionable assumptions?
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
I thought the vast majority were refugees , who were forced to leave their country to escape war.
Merkel in my opinion is a leader to be admired. Germany as a country seems to me , to have more of a moral compass in the world. Than the UK presently has.
From whate was shown on TV the vast majority were economic migrants - mostly young men.
Germany's population has been falling so the politicians believe they need immigrants.
In response to MattW, the UK's success in reducing greenhouse gases is jolly good, but predominantly due to our exporting a lot of our manufacturing industry to China. If you don't make anything, you don't generate nasty emissions. If one really wants to do the full hypocrite thing, one can then denounce China for not doing enough to cut emissions.
Decarbonisation of electricity generation has been relatively easy up to now. However we have achieved most of the easy gains and it gets trickier going forward. (Plus it also relies on pretending that the CO2 emitted from burning wood pellets doesn't exist.)
Plus offshoring highly emitting industry has made the UK figures look good, as you say Nick.
Decarbonisation of heat and transport are a heck of a lot more difficult. A combination of electrification and replacing natural gas with hydrogen looks to be the way forward, but it isn't going to be cheap.
"Plus it also relies on pretending that the CO2 emitted from burning wood pellets doesn't exist."
Unless I have misunderstood, the CO2 released from burning wood pellets is only the equivalent CO2 previously absorbed by the trees from which those pellets have come.
Thus burning wood pellets is carbon-neutral.
It will take 50 years for the CO2 released by burning the wood pellets to be reabsorbed by newly planted trees. Over that time period the planet will probably be totally buggered.
In response to MattW, the UK's success in reducing greenhouse gases is jolly good, but predominantly due to our exporting a lot of our manufacturing industry to China. If you don't make anything, you don't generate nasty emissions. If one really wants to do the full hypocrite thing, one can then denounce China for not doing enough to cut emissions.
Decarbonisation of electricity generation has been relatively easy up to now. However we have achieved most of the easy gains and it gets trickier going forward. (Plus it also relies on pretending that the CO2 emitted from burning wood pellets doesn't exist.)
Plus offshoring highly emitting industry has made the UK figures look good, as you say Nick.
Decarbonisation of heat and transport are a heck of a lot more difficult. A combination of electrification and replacing natural gas with hydrogen looks to be the way forward, but it isn't going to be cheap.
"Plus it also relies on pretending that the CO2 emitted from burning wood pellets doesn't exist."
Unless I have misunderstood, the CO2 released from burning wood pellets is only the equivalent CO2 previously absorbed by the trees from which those pellets have come.
Thus burning wood pellets is carbon-neutral.
It will take 50 years for the CO2 released by burning the wood pellets to be reabsorbed by newly planted trees. Over that time period the planet will probably be totally buggered.
I doubt that is true considering trees are grown especially for wood pellets. We are not cutting down mature woodland for it. Do you have a source?
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But this is the inevitable endpoint of cultural Marxist theory that race has no biological validity, and is merely a "social construct" - and you are whatever race you claim to be. In the end you will get white people pretending to be black so they can benefit from affirmative action meant for blacks.
The same process is now happening in the trans-TERF gender war. Men are claiming to be women, and gaining the benefits that accrue to women just for being women. Cf the "trans" men now barging on to all-women shortlists, or beating women at female sports...
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
Democrat party polling,Dems 1 point ahead in Ohio,New Hampshire level,GeorgiaDems 1 point in front,probably it's just the Dems getting the last ounce out of their GOV teams but Georgia would be quite a scalp and Obama's visit highlights it's a Blue target. High turnout I think is probably going to go in favour of the momentum of the "Blue wave" which could level up the chance of a Dem win in Arizona.11-10 could be a bit over the odds. Texas may just be out of reach-Dems currently best-priced 7-2 -which didn't stop me taking some 4-1.The Dems are set for a very good win.To be a brilliant victory,Texas must fall and it could just happen.
In response to MattW, the UK's success in reducing greenhouse gases is jolly good, but predominantly due to our exporting a lot of our manufacturing industry to China. If you don't make anything, you don't generate nasty emissions. If one really wants to do the full hypocrite thing, one can then denounce China for not doing enough to cut emissions.
Decarbonisation of electricity generation has been relatively easy up to now. However we have achieved most of the easy gains and it gets trickier going forward. (Plus it also relies on pretending that the CO2 emitted from burning wood pellets doesn't exist.)
Plus offshoring highly emitting industry has made the UK figures look good, as you say Nick.
Decarbonisation of heat and transport are a heck of a lot more difficult. A combination of electrification and replacing natural gas with hydrogen looks to be the way forward, but it isn't going to be cheap.
"Plus it also relies on pretending that the CO2 emitted from burning wood pellets doesn't exist."
Unless I have misunderstood, the CO2 released from burning wood pellets is only the equivalent CO2 previously absorbed by the trees from which those pellets have come.
Thus burning wood pellets is carbon-neutral.
It will take 50 years for the CO2 released by burning the wood pellets to be reabsorbed by newly planted trees. Over that time period the planet will probably be totally buggered.
I doubt that is true considering trees are grown especially for wood pellets. We are not cutting down mature woodland for it. Do you have a source?
The pellets come from predominantly mature forestry in the southern US and Canada. These trees are 40 to 50 years old. To grow a new tree to the same level of maturity will take 40 to 50 years.
I do not know the detail with Banks but Marr comes over as hectoring and trying to talk over Banks. Pointless interview as far as I can see
To be honest, if the BBC wanted to do this properly, they would have sent Andrew Neil in for the job.
Marr's continued employment by the BBC is a genuine puzzle. Neil is a Brexit-backing right-winger, but he does his research, knows his stuff and shows no favours to anyone. The fact that Banks was happy to appear on Marr shows how poor an interviewer Marr is. That's why he also gets Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn when Neil doesn't, of course.
I think Marr has been permanently impaired - cognitively, not just physically - by his stroke. I know someone that has encountered him recently, and he confirms this perception. It is rather sad, though also rather noble of the BBC to keep him on board and employed (ditto Frank Gardner).
However, that programme is so important it needs someone absolutely on top of their brief. A dilemma.
Frank Gardner still has a pretty sharp mind though. And he's used to provide commentary, rather than being their man on the spot - a role in which he's obviously no longer able to function.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But this is the inevitable endpoint of cultural Marxist theory that race has no biological validity, and is merely a "social construct" - and you are whatever race you claim to be. In the end you will get white people pretending to be black so they can benefit from affirmative action meant for blacks.
The same process is now happening in the trans-TERF gender war. Men are claiming to be women, and gaining the benefits that accrue to women just for being women. Cf the "trans" men now barging on to all-women shortlists, or beating women at female sports...
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
And to label that ‘cultural Marxist theory’ is tendentious, to say the least.
I do not know the detail with Banks but Marr comes over as hectoring and trying to talk over Banks. Pointless interview as far as I can see
To be honest, if the BBC wanted to do this properly, they would have sent Andrew Neil in for the job.
Marr's continued employment by the BBC is a genuine puzzle. Neil is a Brexit-backing right-winger, but he does his research, knows his stuff and shows no favours to anyone. The fact that Banks was happy to appear on Marr shows how poor an interviewer Marr is. That's why he also gets Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn when Neil doesn't, of course.
I think Marr has been permanently impaired - cognitively, not just physically - by his stroke. I know someone that has encountered him recently, and he confirms this perception. It is rather sad, though also rather noble of the BBC to keep him on board and employed (ditto Frank Gardner).
However, that programme is so important it needs someone absolutely on top of their brief. A dilemma.
Frank Gardner still has a pretty sharp mind though. And he's used to provide commentary, rather than being their man on the spot - a role in which he's obviously no longer able to function.
Gardner remains a pretty good journalist - and has many contacts who don’t readily appear on screen. Marr is just a talking head these days.
I do not know the detail with Banks but Marr comes over as hectoring and trying to talk over Banks. Pointless interview as far as I can see
To be honest, if the BBC wanted to do this properly, they would have sent Andrew Neil in for the job.
Marr's continued employment by the BBC is a genuine puzzle. Neil is a Brexit-backing right-winger, but he does his research, knows his stuff and shows no favours to anyone. The fact that Banks was happy to appear on Marr shows how poor an interviewer Marr is. That's why he also gets Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn when Neil doesn't, of course.
I think Marr has been permanently impaired - cognitively, not just physically - by his stroke. I know someone that has encountered him recently, and he confirms this perception. It is rather sad, though also rather noble of the BBC to keep him on board and employed (ditto Frank Gardner).
However, that programme is so important it needs someone absolutely on top of their brief. A dilemma.
Frank Gardner still has a pretty sharp mind though. And he's used to provide commentary, rather than being their man on the spot - a role in which he's obviously no longer able to function.
Gardner remains a pretty good journalist - and has many contacts who don’t readily appear on screen. Marr is just a talking head these days.
Marr always seems happier interviewing some luvvie who wants to plug their latest play than when he's interviewing politicians.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
In response to MattW, the UK's success in reducing greenhouse gases is jolly good, but predominantly due to our exporting a lot of our manufacturing industry to China. If you don't make anything, you don't generate nasty emissions. If one really wants to do the full hypocrite thing, one can then denounce China for not doing enough to cut emissions.
Decarbonisation of electricity generation has been relatively easy up to now. However we have achieved most of the easy gains and it gets trickier going forward. (Plus it also relies on pretending that the CO2 emitted from burning wood pellets doesn't exist.)
Plus offshoring highly emitting industry has made the UK figures look good, as you say Nick.
Decarbonisation of heat and transport are a heck of a lot more difficult. A combination of electrification and replacing natural gas with hydrogen looks to be the way forward, but it isn't going to be cheap.
"Plus it also relies on pretending that the CO2 emitted from burning wood pellets doesn't exist."
Unless I have misunderstood, the CO2 released from burning wood pellets is only the equivalent CO2 previously absorbed by the trees from which those pellets have come.
Thus burning wood pellets is carbon-neutral.
It will take 50 years for the CO2 released by burning the wood pellets to be reabsorbed by newly planted trees. Over that time period the planet will probably be totally buggered.
I doubt that is true considering trees are grown especially for wood pellets. We are not cutting down mature woodland for it. Do you have a source?
The pellets come from predominantly mature forestry in the southern US and Canada. These trees are 40 to 50 years old. To grow a new tree to the same level of maturity will take 40 to 50 years.
I've been doing some research and it looks like you are right. My apologies.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
Somebody mentioned this the other day: it's illegal to discriminate against somebody on grounds of their race, but the race of a person is assumed by convention, not proven by test. If person X discriminates against person Y on grounds that person Y is black, then person X says "person Y isn't black", what happens?
Given the tired "Merkel was doomed because she let in immigrants" narrative it is a touch odd the massively more pro immigration internationalist greens are surging, absolutely eclipsing the 'insurgent' afd?
Aren't they surging because of the SDP being crap?
Not only. They are up by about 12% on the last election, while the SPD is down about 5%. (the AFD is up 3, CDU down 6). I think what's happened is that the salience of the migration decision has polarised Germany. If you think it was a noble idea, you respect Merkel but you vote Green. If you think it was a terrible idea, you vote AfD. Voting SPD, FDP, Left etc. is all abot economics and taxes and suchlike, and if you think politics is currently about immigration then the Green/AfD choice is what springs to mind, never mind the other stuff.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But this is the inevitable endpoint of cultural Marxist theory that race has no biological validity, and is merely a "social construct" - and you are whatever race you claim to be. In the end you will get white people pretending to be black so they can benefit from affirmative action meant for blacks.
The same process is now happening in the trans-TERF gender war. Men are claiming to be women, and gaining the benefits that accrue to women just for being women. Cf the "trans" men now barging on to all-women shortlists, or beating women at female sports...
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
And to label that ‘cultural Marxist theory’ is tendentious, to say the least.
"Cultural Marxism" is not how anyone describes themselves, it is a term used by alt.right conspiracy theorists, and one with more than a whiff of anti-semitism. No wonder it featured in Breiviks rambling manifesto.
It is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the Frankfurt School's ideas, which are at heart a critique of materialism as a social, economic, cultural and political motivator. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
The people have already spoken in the People's Vote.
"Bought" by a shady businessman
You have very little faith in the intelligence of the people.?
From memory, the median reading age of British[1] adults is 11. The MRC chief says that the average numeracy age of British[1] adults is 8. People become expert when they feel it necessary, but not before. The presumption is that they had done so before the referendum. If you don't make that assumption then referendums and elections become impossible to hold. Referendums and elections are about seeking consent, not selecting the wisest course of action.
[1] The geography was not specified, so it could be UK, GB or E&W given the sources.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But this is the inevitable endpoint of cultural Marxist theory that race has no biological validity, and is merely a "social construct" - and you are whatever race you claim to be. In the end you will get white people pretending to be black so they can benefit from affirmative action meant for blacks.
The same process is now happening in the trans-TERF gender war. Men are claiming to be women, and gaining the benefits that accrue to women just for being women. Cf the "trans" men now barging on to all-women shortlists, or beating women at female sports...
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
And to label that ‘cultural Marxist theory’ is tendentious, to say the least.
"Cultural Marxism" is not how anyone describes themselves, it is a term used by alt.right conspiracy theorists, and one with more than a whiff of anti-semitism. No wonder it featured in Breiviks rambling manifesto.
It is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the Frankfurt School's ideas, which are at heart a critique of materialism as a social, economic, cultural and political motivator. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
So what should we have instead? Literally just statements from politicians without even an attempt to finagle more detail out of them, or explore their positions more?
Good interviewing is hard, and politicians naturally fight hard to avoid being pinned down or to answer difficult questions. That doesn't mean it is pointless, since not doing them seems like giving up and we should just have nothing but unadulterated spin from all sides and not even bother trying to question them.
I was a big fan of the Danish system when I was there (don't know if it's changed). Atr elections, EVERY party got IDENTICAL time slots for (1) 30 minutes to explain their programme, straight to camera, without interruption and (2) 45 minutes of polite but incisive questions by a panel of journalists. Parties with most votes last time got broadcast closest to the election, so you'd warm up with the fringe parties - Christians, Communists, and so on - and get to the Social Democrats and Liberals at the end. On election eve, you'd get a 10-party leader debate (which worked because Danes disapprove of shouty politicians who interrupt each other, so they don't).
The beauty of it was that big parties had to maintain their strength by having better ideas - they weren't getting more time just for being big, and now and then a small party would come up with ideas that resonated and become bigger. Also, you got them saying what they wanted AND some serious questioning.
What they didn't have was celebrity interviewers, who IMO are a curse. David Dimbleby (he of Any Questions on R4) is a good example of a good interviewer - I know at my cost that it's hard to get away with evasion because he spots it and politely asks you to clarify. But you don't get a sense of what he thinks himself, whereas the celebs like Andrew Neil and Jeremy Paxman think the interview is a chance to show off their forensic skills.
The people have already spoken in the People's Vote.
"Bought" by a shady businessman
You have very little faith in the intelligence of the people.?
From memory, the median reading age of British[1] adults is 11. The MRC chief says that the average numeracy age of British[1] adults is 8. People become expert when they feel it necessary, but not before. The presumption is that they had done so before the referendum. If you don't make that assumption then referendums and elections become impossible to hold. Referendums and elections are about seeking consent, not selecting the wisest course of action.
[1] The geography was not specified, so it could be UK, GB or E&W given the sources.
Were the people doing the survey British and if so were they numerate?
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But this is the inevitable endpoint of cultural Marxist theory that race has no biological validity, and is merely a "social construct" - and you are whatever race you claim to be. In the end you will get white people pretending to be black so they can benefit from affirmative action meant for blacks.
The same process is now happening in the trans-TERF gender war. Men are claiming to be women, and gaining the benefits that accrue to women just for being women. Cf the "trans" men now barging on to all-women shortlists, or beating women at female sports...
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
And to label that ‘cultural Marxist theory’ is tendentious, to say the least.
"Cultural Marxism" is not how anyone describes themselves, it is a term used by alt.right conspiracy theorists, and one with more than a whiff of anti-semitism. No wonder it featured in Breiviks rambling manifesto.
It is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the Frankfurt School's ideas, which are at heart a critique of materialism as a social, economic, cultural and political motivator. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But this is the inevitable endpoint of cultural Marxist theory that race has no biological validity, and is merely a "social construct" - and you are whatever race you claim to be. In the end you will get white people pretending to be black so they can benefit from affirmative action meant for blacks.
The same process is now happening in the trans-TERF gender war. Men are claiming to be women, and gaining the benefits that accrue to women just for being women. Cf the "trans" men now barging on to all-women shortlists, or beating women at female sports...
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
And to label that ‘cultural Marxist theory’ is tendentious, to say the least.
"Cultural Marxism" is not how anyone describes themselves, it is a term used by alt.right conspiracy theorists, and one with more than a whiff of anti-semitism. No wonder it featured in Breiviks rambling manifesto.
It is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the Frankfurt School's ideas, which are at heart a critique of materialism as a social, economic, cultural and political motivator. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
An old article, but after last weeks attack on a Pittsburgh Synagogue by a person convinced Jews are trying to destroy American culture, a very relevant one.
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
Somebody mentioned this the other day: it's illegal to discriminate against somebody on grounds of their race, but the race of a person is assumed by convention, not proven by test. If person X discriminates against person Y on grounds that person Y is black, then person X says "person Y isn't black", what happens?
What if person X self identifies as black - so it becomes black on black?
"Cultural Marxism" is not how anyone describes themselves, it is a term used by alt.right conspiracy theorists, and one with more than a whiff of anti-semitism. No wonder it featured in Breiviks rambling manifesto.
It is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the Frankfurt School's ideas, which are at heart a critique of materialism as a social, economic, cultural and political motivator. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
So is "Cultural Marxism" actually a thing or an alt-right straw-man? I've seen it pop up a lot more recently (the new Dr Who is female and not all the reviewers are best pleased[1]) so if it's a real thing as @SeanT insists then I need to know.
[1] Note to self: get better cultural references...
The people have already spoken in the People's Vote.
"Bought" by a shady businessman
You have very little faith in the intelligence of the people.?
From memory, the median reading age of British[1] adults is 11. The MRC chief says that the average numeracy age of British[1] adults is 8. People become expert when they feel it necessary, but not before. The presumption is that they had done so before the referendum. If you don't make that assumption then referendums and elections become impossible to hold. Referendums and elections are about seeking consent, not selecting the wisest course of action.
[1] The geography was not specified, so it could be UK, GB or E&W given the sources.
Were the people doing the survey British and if so were they numerate?
I think the reading age was ONS (might be wrong), but the numeracy age was an anecdote from the "MRC" (sic: it should have been MRS, https://www.mrs.org.uk/ ) head, so take it on that basis.
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
Somebody mentioned this the other day: it's illegal to discriminate against somebody on grounds of their race, but the race of a person is assumed by convention, not proven by test. If person X discriminates against person Y on grounds that person Y is black, then person X says "person Y isn't black", what happens?
What if person X self identifies as black - so it becomes black on black?
I know, but my question was what happens legally?. Has this happened in a court of law? What is the legal criterion for judging whether person Y is black?
I think people consider Marxism as about equality between all people. Obviously in the mind of Mr Marx that meant economics. But it is undoubtedly true that an attempt has been made to push an egalitarian agenda through cultural arguments. Look at postmodernists like Foucault or Derrida.
The term is used because of the approach to cultural issues on the radical left in university campuses. I don't see the term cultural marxist as unfair and certainly not anti-semitic. It's possible anti-semites may use it but that is a different matter. The argument about restricting free speech of privileged white men being a case in point.
"Cultural Marxism" is not how anyone describes themselves, it is a term used by alt.right conspiracy theorists, and one with more than a whiff of anti-semitism. No wonder it featured in Breiviks rambling manifesto.
It is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the Frankfurt School's ideas, which are at heart a critique of materialism as a social, economic, cultural and political motivator. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
So is "Cultural Marxism" actually a thing or an alt-right straw-man? I've seen it pop up a lot more recently (the new Dr Who is female and not all the reviewers are best pleased[1]) so if it's a real thing as @SeanT insists then I need to know.
[1] Note to self: get better cultural references...
There is a culture war happening. It was an easy win for the left. Sailing merrily along. Except Brexit and trump exposed it fir what it is. Now we are seeing a classic case of doubling down.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But this is the inevitable endpoint of cultural Marxist theory that race has no biological validity, and is merely a "social construct" - and you are whatever race you claim to be. In the end you will get white people pretending to be black so they can benefit from affirmative action meant for blacks.
The same process is now happening in the trans-TERF gender war. Men are claiming to be women, and gaining the benefits that accrue to women just for being women. Cf the "trans" men now barging on to all-women shortlists, or beating women at female sports...
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
And to label that ‘cultural Marxist theory’ is tendentious, to say the least.
"Cultural Marxism" is not how anyone describes themselves, it is a term used by alt.right conspiracy theorists, and one with more than a whiff of anti-semitism. No wonder it featured in Breiviks rambling manifesto.
It is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the Frankfurt School's ideas, which are at heart a critique of materialism as a social, economic, cultural and political motivator. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
An old article, but after last weeks attack on a Pittsburgh Synagogue by a person convinced Jews are trying to destroy American culture, a very relevant one.
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But this is the inevitable endpoint of cultural Marxist theory that race has no biological validity, and is merely a "social construct" - and you are whatever race you claim to be. In the end you will get white people pretending to be black so they can benefit from affirmative action meant for blacks.
The same process is now happening in the trans-TERF gender war. Men are claiming to be women, and gaining the benefits that accrue to women just for being women. Cf the "trans" men now barging on to all-women shortlists, or beating women at female sports...
The two things are somewhat different in that there really is no real biological basis for race, whereas that for gender is rather more clear cut.
And to label that ‘cultural Marxist theory’ is tendentious, to say the least.
"Cultural Marxism" is not how anyone describes themselves, it is a term used by alt.right conspiracy theorists, and one with more than a whiff of anti-semitism. No wonder it featured in Breiviks rambling manifesto.
r. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
An old article, but after last weeks attack on a Pittsburgh Synagogue by a person convinced Jews are trying to destroy American culture, a very relevant one.
What utter piffle.
Splc who had to give the LBC presenter maajid nawaz a multi million dollar damages payout because they labelled his denouncement of Islamic extremisism as ‘hatred’.
The Shami Chakrabati of institutions. Once respected for doing good work, but now just empty partisan shills.
New Caledonia is an interesting spot. I had a few days stopover there on the way back from NZ in 1990. In practice, Noumea is like a small French town, albeit one with more visible minorities, the countryside nearly completely Kanak. Interestingly the Kanaks play cricket, albeit a bit unconventionally! The Kanaks and Noumea each have considerable autonomy in local government that allows it to work.
It was a very pleasant bit of backpacking, until we caught the airport bus for the flight onwards on a Friday evening. Mrs Foxy and I were the only white people on the bus, and the only sober passangers, as the remainder were all Kanaks having drunk their mining wages and heading home for the weekend up the coast in their villages. The hostility was palpable, and we were a bit intimidated. After a couple of miles, a drunk fell off his seat. I checked he was ok, and his companion slurred at me in French. I replied that my French was limited, Je suis Anglais!
Instantly, the atmosphere changed. Once they knew we were not French settlers it was a different ride, with smiles, drinks and food being pressed on us. At the airport we were waved off the bus. Unfortunately as the bus pulled away we found that the airport was locked and closed, but that is another travel anecdote.
Interesting anecdote.
Given about 27% of the New Caledonia population are ethnic Europeans their vote was probably key in defeating the independence vote
There is a big Polynesian minority too, Kanaks being Melanesian like PNG, so Kanaks are a minority overall.
Comments
That that was the question was obvious from the coverage on the WATO earlier this week and the interview with Liz Bilney.
Marr is a useless interviewer. Maybe the BBC keep him on because they feel sorry for him.
https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1059042017194508288
After 2 defeated independence referendums most Quebecois are now focused on domestic issues
Possible?
I’d like to go back to being 20 again and trying to get into a certain blonde’s knickers, but it’s just about as likely as WTO and No Deal.
https://www.leavemeansleave.eu/
After all, Brexit is often seen as part of a “right-wing populist tide” and yet many pro-Brexit voters voted for Labour the following year. These changes are usually more complex than they appear to commentators intent on shoehorning events into a preconceived view.
Political interviews are a form of theatre. Sometimes a particularly hapless or unlucky interviewee will have a "car crash", which keeps things exciting, but generally it's just a platform for somebody to say whatever they want, with a sprinkle of deflection to acknowledge the question they were asked.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46087053
Good interviewing is hard, and politicians naturally fight hard to avoid being pinned down or to answer difficult questions. That doesn't mean it is pointless, since not doing them seems like giving up and we should just have nothing but unadulterated spin from all sides and not even bother trying to question them.
Oh goody for them.
If he is lying and the cash came from abroad presumably the police will tell us.
Andrew Marr ignored the answers and just talked over Banks, which led to the interview being rather chaotic rather than forensic.
“Democrats traumatized by 2016 are having pre-midterms nightmares”
“Democrats barrel toward Election Day confident of House takeover”
(sorry)
Edit Rock Services made a £316 000 operating loss on £40 million insurance business. It seems unlikely to support a £8 million loan
It was a very pleasant bit of backpacking, until we caught the airport bus for the flight onwards on a Friday evening. Mrs Foxy and I were the only white people on the bus, and the only sober passangers, as the remainder were all Kanaks having drunk their mining wages and heading home for the weekend up the coast in their villages. The hostility was palpable, and we were a bit intimidated. After a couple of miles, a drunk fell off his seat. I checked he was ok, and his companion slurred at me in French. I replied that my French was limited, Je suis Anglais!
Instantly, the atmosphere changed. Once they knew we were not French settlers it was a different ride, with smiles, drinks and food being pressed on us. At the airport we were waved off the bus. Unfortunately as the bus pulled away we found that the airport was locked and closed, but that is another travel anecdote.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/03/governments-policy-electric-cars-great-news-importer-petrol/
Given about 27% of the New Caledonia population are ethnic Europeans their vote was probably key in defeating the independence vote
https://www.politico.eu/article/matteo-salvini-luigi-di-maio-league-5star-italy-grows-in-popularity-as-5star-support-falls/
Merkel in my opinion is a leader to be admired.
Germany as a country seems to me , to have more of a moral compass in the world.
Than the UK presently has.
Increasingly world politics is uncomfortably reconfiguring between ethno-nationalists and those who see the values of their country more broadly, and comfortable engaging with the world outside.
https://twitter.com/granttucker/status/1059047919351984128?s=21
https://twitter.com/granttucker/status/1059050064809734145?s=21
This is nearly as bad as when some middle class people pretend to be working class, this guy deserves to be horsewhipped for taking away the opportunities of the disadvantaged.
But frankly I am surprised there are not more stories of people identifying as other races. It can be hard to tell sometimes in any case.
Germany's population has been falling so the politicians believe they need immigrants.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/12/24/reviewing-2017-the-polling-that-made-me-think-53-of-the-electorate-should-be-denied-the-vote/
High turnout I think is probably going to go in favour of the momentum of the "Blue wave" which could level up the chance of a Dem win in Arizona.11-10 could be a bit over the odds.
Texas may just be out of reach-Dems currently best-priced 7-2 -which didn't stop me taking some 4-1.The Dems are set for a very good win.To be a brilliant victory,Texas must fall and it could just happen.
Marr is just a talking head these days.
(What, no "Watchmen" fans? The sooner @Richard_Tyndall comes back, the better...
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
It is also a fundamental misunderstanding of the Frankfurt School's ideas, which are at heart a critique of materialism as a social, economic, cultural and political motivator. Something that Brexiteers or Trumpists who see erosion of their sovereignty and cultural identity should be able to agree with. I commend this article to understand the critique.
https://areomagazine.com/2018/08/11/who-is-afraid-of-cultural-marxism-what-the-frankfurt-school-can-still-teach-us/
[1] The geography was not specified, so it could be UK, GB or E&W given the sources.
The beauty of it was that big parties had to maintain their strength by having better ideas - they weren't getting more time just for being big, and now and then a small party would come up with ideas that resonated and become bigger. Also, you got them saying what they wanted AND some serious questioning.
What they didn't have was celebrity interviewers, who IMO are a curse. David Dimbleby (he of Any Questions on R4) is a good example of a good interviewer - I know at my cost that it's hard to get away with evasion because he spots it and politely asks you to clarify. But you don't get a sense of what he thinks himself, whereas the celebs like Andrew Neil and Jeremy Paxman think the interview is a chance to show off their forensic skills.
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2003/cultural-marxism-catching
This article explains it:
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2003/cultural-marxism-catching
An old article, but after last weeks attack on a Pittsburgh Synagogue by a person convinced Jews are trying to destroy American culture, a very relevant one.
[1] Note to self: get better cultural references...
NEW THREAD
The term is used because of the approach to cultural issues on the radical left in university campuses. I don't see the term cultural marxist as unfair and certainly not anti-semitic. It's possible anti-semites may use it but that is a different matter. The argument about restricting free speech of privileged white men being a case in point.
The Shami Chakrabati of institutions. Once respected for doing good work, but now just empty partisan shills.