Another factor to consider iro anti semitism and effect on VI is not the accusation themselves but the effect on waverers of the attack dogs unleashed by momentum on Welby and the Chief Rabbi. The real face of the kinder gentler politics
There’s the potential that Labour might get a boost from it.
Something I looked at last year, Leavers are more likely to endorse antisemitic statements for example.
Rather a sad commentary but possibly true. There is a widespread belief that Jews are rich and the group most likely to be unsympathetic to the wealthy feeling sorry for themselves are Labour voters in deprived areas.
Uncanny that it's always righty Brexiteers who assure everyone that their vision of Brexit has absolutely nothing to do with Empire nostalgia who are the loudest defenders of the BE and its veneration. Probably just a coincidence..
Not really. Brexit does have nothing to do with Empire nostalgia - but people who are not ashamed of their country are less keen to see their country abolished than those who are ashamed of it.
But your an English nationalist. What's the long dead British Empire got to do with your country, abolished or not?
And you are a Scottish nationalist. What's that got to do with anything?
Britain is my country just as it is yours. You may perhaps turn your back on Britain, but I don't. There is a continuum between England and Britain and the United Kingdom. Unless or until England becomes independent again my country will be the UK.
And yet, there is the Brexit condundrum. England wants to Leave, Scotland and NI want to Remain. Brexit is largely driven by English nationalism.
If Scotland wants to be tied to us, they will have to do what we want to do sometimes. We are the considerably more populace partner and that is how democracy works.
If Scotland wants to make independent decisions there is only one way to do that - they need to be an independent country outside the EU.
If you want to feel proud of your country, feel proud of Goethe and Beethoven or Shakespeare and Darwin. Glorification of the history of violence is just ugly and dangerous.
Without the differences in turnout the Tories would be on 36 v Labour on 35 in the Kantar poll !
We can be pretty certain the Tories will be in the 40s. Leave vote is 46-52 points.
By that logic, can't you say that the Lib Dems will be in the 40s or 50s?
I would count the remain vote as all parties bar BXP and the Tories. Clearly most remainers will vote Labour. More remainers will vote Tory than leavers vote Labour I think (the polls support this). Assume Greens/SNP and Plaid are on 4-6 points then we have a range of 44-49 points for Lab/LD combined. At the moment I would say that split is currently around 34% Labour and 13% Lib Dems. if the Libs gets squeezed down to 10% or lower Labour will go high 30s which could be enough for NOM.
I can’t see the Tories going below low 40s without a black swan event as there is nowhere else for the leave vote to go realistically.
I'm not sure what you mean about trying to make Germans feel guilty? I find Germany to be one of the few countries to have a realistic view of its past, and would strongly welcome Britain adopting the same attitude. There is no nostalgia here for the German Overseas Empire that effectively ended in the First World War - which is the equivalent of the British Empire (the attempt to create a "Third Empire" in the 30s and 40s being a little different, although Hitler was inspired by the British Empire). No Germans are saying the German Empire was better than other empires - although you can certainly find literature from the 20s and 30s from German rightwing historians claiming exactly that, saying that German rule in places like German East Africa had been better than British, French or Belgian rule in their African colonies (citing, for example, the superior education system and, yes, the railways again). And arguing that it was terrible injustice that the former German colonies were effectively under the control of those countries. It's really striking how those arguments from German nationalists in the 20s sound exactly the same as current glorifiers of Britain's past.
If you want to feel proud of your country, feel proud of Goethe and Beethoven or Shakespeare and Darwin. Glorification of the history of violence is just ugly and dangerous.
I don't know if people here have read Inglorious Empire by Shashi Tharoor, but it opened my eyes to a lot of things. I was never an Empire defender, but still the British education system had taught me certain things about pre colonial India that were obviously false, and the concept of our Empire doing "good" is taken down point by point. The really interesting stuff looks into specific sectors where India was a world leader and how the English specifically regulated away those sectors (building boats being one) so that English manufacturing could monopolise a market, whilst at the same time crowing about free trade. V interesting read.
O/T Yes I think that pretty well everyone agrees that in deepest London Remainia the LDs are in a position to pick up several Conservative seats, especially if tactical voting starts to kick in.
However, the opposite side to that coin is that the LDs must be at risk in the seats they hold that voted Leave. That's North Norfolk, Eastbourne and Carshalton, with Leave % votes of 58%, 57% and 56% respectively. I think all three are more likely than not to go Tory even assuming that the LDs pick up a half dozen or so in London. Of these, North Norfolk is the most likely to go blue, aided by Lamb standing down. Westmorland is another where the Leave/Remain vote is fairly evenly split, although I think Farron will hang on there. The betting odds are not properly reflecting the fact that these seats are in play - 6/4 on Con for N Norfolk with Paddy Power and Ladbrokes is good value.
The constituency polling we have has unfortunately been heavily biased towards the entirely untypical seats which the LDs might feel they are in contention against Con or Lab - 13 of the 18 constituencies with specific polling on the Wiki site. Yet there have been only three constituency polls in seats where Lab is under threat from the Conservatives, and none in seats where the LDs are vulnerable.
I always follow the Wulfrunian tips, so thank you for these.
I'm convinced that Lamb, who has been around Norfolk N for 30 years, must have had a large personal vote, which will dissipate.
I see your tip and think it is fair but 6/4 did cause me to do a double take. I've checked my bets from 2 weeks ago and I got 3/1 on Con Gain N Norfolk. So I'm doubly happy with your tip this morning.
To any of those who still think the mural that Corbyn now realises was anti-Semitic and has apologised for supporting wasn't in fact anti-Semitic, Lord Dubs was on R4 this morning saying he was horrified by the mural when he saw it. He seemed to imply Corbyn was too ignorant to realise how bad it was, but it's ok because he's apologised.
There's nothing obviously anti-semitic in that mural. Every time someone dares question why it's anti-semitic, it's not answered. I'm stunned that this trope continues and people seem to exercise no critical function whatsoever. It depicts some of the worlds richest banking magnates (including 3 who happen to be not at all Jewish and 2 who happen to be), feeding off the back of the world's poor, and it more subtly attacks freemasonry (which is not associated with Judaism). Some say the noses are exaggerated: that is not obviously so. Whether the painting is bad, or the otherwise unknown artist may feasibly (or not) be anti-semitic is not relevant to this point. Oh and Berger, Corbyn, Dubs or anyone else thinking initially or later that it is antisemitic demonstrates nothing about whether it actually is so, merely political manoeuvring, as TrèsDifficile's posts alludes to.
Heard a joke the other day:
"How do you tell the difference between an antisemite and a relentless, monotonous, irrational denier, mitigator and defender of antisemitism?"
"I don't know. How do you tell the difference between an antisemite and a relentless, monotonous, irrational denier, mitigator and defender of antisemitism?"
You don't seem able to take the most basic steps to ensure you know what you are talking about.
You do realise you've just illustrated what was said in the comment you replied to: "Every time someone dares question why it's anti-semitic, it's not answered."?
Why not answer it?
I have shown that he hasn't the first idea what he is talking about (over the freemasonry point). But read this, if you are really in doubt (and I would bet the farm you aren't)
Uncanny that it's always righty Brexiteers who assure everyone that their vision of Brexit has absolutely nothing to do with Empire nostalgia who are the loudest defenders of the BE and its veneration. Probably just a coincidence..
Not really. Brexit does have nothing to do with Empire nostalgia - but people who are not ashamed of their country are less keen to see their country abolished than those who are ashamed of it.
But your an English nationalist. What's the long dead British Empire got to do with your country, abolished or not?
And you are a Scottish nationalist. What's that got to do with anything?
Britain is my country just as it is yours. You may perhaps turn your back on Britain, but I don't. There is a continuum between England and Britain and the United Kingdom. Unless or until England becomes independent again my country will be the UK.
And yet, there is the Brexit condundrum. England wants to Leave, Scotland and NI want to Remain. Brexit is largely driven by English nationalism.
If Scotland wants to be tied to us, they will have to do what we want to do sometimes. We are the considerably more populace partner and that is how democracy works.
If Scotland wants to make independent decisions there is only one way to do that - they need to be an independent country outside the EU.
'We are the considerably more populace partner' Are you sure that you're English (or whatever confused, UK-centred identity you're adopting today)?
Looks increasingly like Labour have moved into the low 30s. Tories holding at about 42, so if labour want to get it down to 5 or so they need to eat into the LD vote hard. I thi k the Tories would bank a 10 or 11 gap on the 12th now if offered!
Surely it depends on which seats the the Labour and Lib Dem votes are in. If Labour end up on 35% and the Lib Dems on 15% and that is spread evenly across the country then Johnson gets a big majority. If Labour's 35% are concentrated in seats they can win and the Lib Dem's 15% is concentrated in seats they can win then who knows?
Labour eating into the Lib Dem vote nationally won't benefit them at all if those votes are coming from places like Guildford, Cheltenham or Richmond. If they are in Con/Lab marginals, different story. Likewise Lib Dems could be as low as 10% and still pick up 40 seats if their votes are concentrated in the seats they can win.
This election is certainly turning weird. Philip Thompson now eulogising over our glorious contribution to the slave trade.
You accidentally missed a word.
I am eulogising over our glorious contribution to abolishing the slave trade.
Is that like the glory of a terrorist kidnapper releasing remaining hostages (having tortured them, and killed the others)?
A better move, yes. Better fortune for those who no longer have to suffer, yes.
But it's hard for one to see glory in ceasing to incarcerate, murder, and abuse humans (in this case for the earlier financial gain for an empire that still leaves many legacies, including a substantial element of the framework for control of land, human, and natural resources today).
Because you are a fool who is looking from today's standards.
Historically slavery was normal. Its in the Bible, its in every power historically. That the UK abolished it is absolutely unprecedented and remarkable. We only view slavery as being odd now precisely BECAUSE it was abolished by our predecessors, had we been born hundreds or thousands of years ago it would have been normal.
"absolutely unprecedented" is absolutely wrong. plenty of countries abolished slavery before Britain.
Uncanny that it's always righty Brexiteers who assure everyone that their vision of Brexit has absolutely nothing to do with Empire nostalgia who are the loudest defenders of the BE and its veneration. Probably just a coincidence..
Not really. Brexit does have nothing to do with Empire nostalgia - but people who are not ashamed of their country are less keen to see their country abolished than those who are ashamed of it.
But your an English nationalist. What's the long dead British Empire got to do with your country, abolished or not?
And you are a Scottish nationalist. What's that got to do with anything?
Britain is my country just as it is yours. You may perhaps turn your back on Britain, but I don't. There is a continuum between England and Britain and the United Kingdom. Unless or until England becomes independent again my country will be the UK.
And yet, there is the Brexit condundrum. England wants to Leave, Scotland and NI want to Remain. Brexit is largely driven by English nationalism.
If Scotland wants to be tied to us, they will have to do what we want to do sometimes. We are the considerably more populace partner and that is how democracy works.
If Scotland wants to make independent decisions there is only one way to do that - they need to be an independent country outside the EU.
'We are the considerably more populace partner' Are you sure that you're English (or whatever confused, UK-centred identity you're adopting today)?
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
If Priti Patel is a "Liberal Conservative" we have departed this world and entered a new one with a different perspective on reality and a whole new language to go with it. Exciting!
To any of those who still think the mural that Corbyn now realises was anti-Semitic and has apologised for supporting wasn't in fact anti-Semitic, Lord Dubs was on R4 this morning saying he was horrified by the mural when he saw it. He seemed to imply Corbyn was too ignorant to realise how bad it was, but it's ok because he's apologised.
There's nothing obviously anti-semitic in that mural. Every time someone dares question why it's anti-semitic, it's not answered. I'm stunned that this trope continues and people seem to exercise no critical function whatsoever. It depicts some of the worlds richest banking magnates (including 3 who happen to be not at all Jewish and 2 who happen to be), feeding off the back of the world's poor, and it more subtly attacks freemasonry (which is not associated with Judaism). Some say the noses are exaggerated: that is not obviously so. Whether the painting is bad, or the otherwise unknown artist may feasibly (or not) be anti-semitic is not relevant to this point. Oh and Berger, Corbyn, Dubs or anyone else thinking initially or later that it is antisemitic demonstrates nothing about whether it actually is so, merely political manoeuvring, as TrèsDifficile's posts alludes to.
Heard a joke the other day:
"How do you tell the difference between an antisemite and a relentless, monotonous, irrational denier, mitigator and defender of antisemitism?"
"I don't know. How do you tell the difference between an antisemite and a relentless, monotonous, irrational denier, mitigator and defender of antisemitism?"
You don't seem able to take the most basic steps to ensure you know what you are talking about.
It's fair to point out that I didn't address the connection anti-Semites (particularly hard right) have tried to make between Freemasonry and Zionism (to manipulate people's distrust of Freemasonry against Jews).
It's intellectually lazy and grossly manipulative to infer I'm anti-semitic from my last post.
Fairly, or not, Freemasonry is more frequently associated with a secretive network of elites controlling decisions and resources, at the expense of the populous.
So, in the context of this mural, which attacks banking cartels (regardless of religion) and portrays mainly non-Jewish bankers, there's no *apparent* anti-Semitism, and it's disingenuous to contort it to try and weaponize it so.
Freemasonry is not based on Judaism nor is is Jewish or Zionist. Jews were not allowed to join many masonic lodges for decades. Regardless, anti-Semites (including Hitler) have tried to link Jews with freemasonry to attack them. But the context of the mural and what it depicts is what is relevant here and to any observer of it.
That Kantar poll is going to bring the average lead down to 40 surely
Poll numbers before today's Kantar were as follows for the Tories: 41, 43, 41, 42, 47, 42, 42, 41, 43, 42. Average of those 10 polls is 42.4%. So 43% today is in line with that average, it's not going to reduce the Tory average share.
I can see this 43% average staying firm right up to the moment that the tories win 318 seats.
43% firm would be good, if 2017 had never happened.
This election is certainly turning weird. Philip Thompson now eulogising over our glorious contribution to the slave trade.
You accidentally missed a word.
I am eulogising over our glorious contribution to abolishing the slave trade.
Is that like the glory of a terrorist kidnapper releasing remaining hostages (having tortured them, and killed the others)?
A better move, yes. Better fortune for those who no longer have to suffer, yes.
But it's hard for one to see glory in ceasing to incarcerate, murder, and abuse humans (in this case for the earlier financial gain for an empire that still leaves many legacies, including a substantial element of the framework for control of land, human, and natural resources today).
Because you are a fool who is looking from today's standards.
Historically slavery was normal. Its in the Bible, its in every power historically. That the UK abolished it is absolutely unprecedented and remarkable. We only view slavery as being odd now precisely BECAUSE it was abolished by our predecessors, had we been born hundreds or thousands of years ago it would have been normal.
‘The past is a foreign country - they do things differently there’ - this seems to be lost on the modern thought police.
In living memory it was scandalous that my mum carried on working when she got married, and didn’t become a housewife. We have a proud role in the abolition of slavery in this country. Did we benefit before that? Almost certainly yes.
Views on race have massively changed in my own lifetime. When I went to university in Bradford my Nan opined if I would get a beautiful p-ki girlfriend. She wasn’t racist, she didn’t say it with any hate, in fact she said it in a way that thought it was somehow exotic and good. I was shocked at the language used but recognised the sentiment. Racist stereotypes existed in education - black kids are thick but Asian kids are clever, as if you can distinguish between economic circumstance and life chances.
The only way we can act now is to acknowledge it was wrong and move on
To any of those who still think the mural that Corbyn now realises was anti-Semitic and has apologised for supporting wasn't in fact anti-Semitic, Lord Dubs was on R4 this morning saying he was horrified by the mural when he saw it. He seemed to imply Corbyn was too ignorant to realise how bad it was, but it's ok because he's apologised.
There's nothing obviously anti-semitic in that mural. Every time someone dares question why it's anti-semitic, it's not answered. I'm stunned that this trope continues and people seem to exercise no critical function whatsoever. It depicts some of the worlds richest banking magnates (including 3 who happen to be not at all Jewish and 2 who happen to be), feeding off the back of the world's poor, and it more subtly attacks freemasonry (which is not associated with Judaism). Some say the noses are exaggerated: that is not obviously so. Whether the painting is bad, or the otherwise unknown artist may feasibly (or not) be anti-semitic is not relevant to this point. Oh and Berger, Corbyn, Dubs or anyone else thinking initially or later that it is antisemitic demonstrates nothing about whether it actually is so, merely political manoeuvring, as TrèsDifficile's posts alludes to.
Heard a joke the other day:
"How do you tell the difference between an antisemite and a relentless, monotonous, irrational denier, mitigator and defender of antisemitism?"
"I don't know. How do you tell the difference between an antisemite and a relentless, monotonous, irrational denier, mitigator and defender of antisemitism?"
You don't seem able to take the most basic steps to ensure you know what you are talking about.
You do realise you've just illustrated what was said in the comment you replied to: "Every time someone dares question why it's anti-semitic, it's not answered."?
Why not answer it?
I have shown that he hasn't the first idea what he is talking about (over the freemasonry point). But read this, if you are really in doubt (and I would bet the farm you aren't)
And if you still disagree take it up with Corbyn. He says it's antisemitic. Why would he say that?
"I sincerely regret that I did not look more closely at the image I was commenting on, the contents of which are deeply disturbing and anti-Semitic." Jeremy Corbyn
I'm not sure what you mean about trying to make Germans feel guilty? I find Germany to be one of the few countries to have a realistic view of its past, and would strongly welcome Britain adopting the same attitude. There is no nostalgia here for the German Overseas Empire that effectively ended in the First World War - which is the equivalent of the British Empire (the attempt to create a "Third Empire" in the 30s and 40s being a little different, although Hitler was inspired by the British Empire). No Germans are saying the German Empire was better than other empires - although you can certainly find literature from the 20s and 30s from German rightwing historians claiming exactly that, saying that German rule in places like German East Africa had been better than British, French or Belgian rule in their African colonies (citing, for example, the superior education system and, yes, the railways again). And arguing that it was terrible injustice that the former German colonies were effectively under the control of those countries. It's really striking how those arguments from German nationalists in the 20s sound exactly the same as current glorifiers of Britain's past.
If you want to feel proud of your country, feel proud of Goethe and Beethoven or Shakespeare and Darwin. Glorification of the history of violence is just ugly and dangerous.
I don't know if people here have read Inglorious Empire by Shashi Tharoor, but it opened my eyes to a lot of things. I was never an Empire defender, but still the British education system had taught me certain things about pre colonial India that were obviously false, and the concept of our Empire doing "good" is taken down point by point. The really interesting stuff looks into specific sectors where India was a world leader and how the English specifically regulated away those sectors (building boats being one) so that English manufacturing could monopolise a market, whilst at the same time crowing about free trade. V interesting read.
Don't think we have a lot to be proud about with the cotton trade, either. Rather ironic that the one-time cotton towns of Lancashire now have significant Asian populations.
And 'If you want to feel proud of your country, feel proud of Goethe and Beethoven or Shakespeare and Darwin.' One of the, if not the, best posted 'thoughts for today'!
You sense the great and good are holding fire till they see the whites of their eyes. This morning Hesseltine broke cover.....
The Great Remain Alliance has held the Tory government in check for three years. Through the courts through multi million name petitions...through the largest demo London has ever seen Surely the next two weeks are going to see an anti Johnson onslaught which will blow this election wide open
Hesseltine broke cover years ago. He is a Europhile extremist who ceased to be a Conservative and hasn't reconciled himself to our democratic decision to reverse the work he did in building towards the creation of the EU. We are rejecting a lot of his life's work, this is personal to him and that is not news to anyone. I don't think anyone will swing their vote because of him.
I agree. It's all about the zeitgeist. It's starting to occur to voters that 'getting Brexit done' won't be the simple job Johnson has made it appear. Someone this morning said 'ten years'. It's now moving up the scale of issues the public are taking an interest in. If the idea that Johnson's deal will take years of the same there's every chance they'll want out.
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
If Priti Patel is a "Liberal Conservative" we have departed this world and entered a new one with a different perspective on reality and a whole new language to go with it. Exciting!
What has she done in office that is illiberal?
And don't say the death penalty, she opposes the death penalty and hasn't introduced it while in office.
Uncanny that it's always righty Brexiteers who assure everyone that their vision of Brexit has absolutely nothing to do with Empire nostalgia who are the loudest defenders of the BE and its veneration. Probably just a coincidence..
Not really.
People who don’t believe that the U.K. can be an independent force for good in the world are more likely to sublimate us in the EU.
I used U.K. because I would hate to understate the contribution of our brave Scottish brothers and sisters to the empire
So it's not really a coincidence? Ok. You're certainly right that I don’t believe that the U.K. governed by people like Johnson, Patel and Raab and in thrall to Trump can be an independent force for good in the world. These ****s would be hard pressed to be a force for good in their own back gardens.
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
Is the death penalty a liberal Conservative position?
Does Patel support the death penalty?
She did and defended it vehemently, although she claims to no longer hold that position. Her general attitude to crime is one of force, wanting criminals to feel "terror", rather than justice. I also feel the general conservative rhetoric around crime is purposefully authoritarian; no person is inherently a criminal, they commit criminal acts, some out of desperation, some out of greed. Whilst people have linked police numbers to crime (something there is no consensus for) we do not that poverty is linked to crime, which in my mind would suggest that most "criminals" are not doing it because of something wrong with them, but something wrong with the society they live in and an attempt to just survive. https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1198665587490263046
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
This election is certainly turning weird. Philip Thompson now eulogising over our glorious contribution to the slave trade.
You accidentally missed a word.
I am eulogising over our glorious contribution to abolishing the slave trade.
Is that like the glory of a terrorist kidnapper releasing remaining hostages (having tortured them, and killed the others)?
A better move, yes. Better fortune for those who no longer have to suffer, yes.
But it's hard for one to see glory in ceasing to incarcerate, murder, and abuse humans (in this case for the earlier financial gain for an empire that still leaves many legacies, including a substantial element of the framework for control of land, human, and natural resources today).
Because you are a fool who is looking from today's standards.
Historically slavery was normal. Its in the Bible, its in every power historically. That the UK abolished it is absolutely unprecedented and remarkable. We only view slavery as being odd now precisely BECAUSE it was abolished by our predecessors, had we been born hundreds or thousands of years ago it would have been normal.
"absolutely unprecedented" is absolutely wrong. plenty of countries abolished slavery before Britain.
Name one country that abolished the slave trade before us. Not just within their country but using their power to prevent other nations from trading slaves too.
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
If Priti Patel is a "Liberal Conservative" we have departed this world and entered a new one with a different perspective on reality and a whole new language to go with it. Exciting!
Reality is being defenestrated via the Overton Window day by day.
2.3 million watched a forensic, detailed interview between @afneil and @NicolaSturgeon on BBC1 last night. Important for democracy that millions are engaging in interviews with the party leaders. Tonight at 7pm it's @jeremycorbyn 's turn. #GE2019
Looks increasingly like Labour have moved into the low 30s. Tories holding at about 42, so if labour want to get it down to 5 or so they need to eat into the LD vote hard. I thi k the Tories would bank a 10 or 11 gap on the 12th now if offered!
Surely it depends on which seats the the Labour and Lib Dem votes are in. If Labour end up on 35% and the Lib Dems on 15% and that is spread evenly across the country then Johnson gets a big majority. If Labour's 35% are concentrated in seats they can win and the Lib Dem's 15% is concentrated in seats they can win then who knows?
Labour eating into the Lib Dem vote nationally won't benefit them at all if those votes are coming from places like Guildford, Cheltenham or Richmond. If they are in Con/Lab marginals, different story. Likewise Lib Dems could be as low as 10% and still pick up 40 seats if their votes are concentrated in the seats they can win.
I think the only seats the Lib Dems can win off the Tories with less than 40% of the vote are 3 way margins in City of London, and longer shots in Putney, Finchley and Wimbledon.
Beyond that with no BXP the Tories are going to be getting 40% minimum in pretty much all their held seats where the Libs have aspirations. How many Lib Dem targets are there where they are capable of getting over 40%? I would argue 15 max and they certainly won't win all of them.
The Tories will realise the Libs won't be the ones responsible for them not getting a majority, it will be the failure to take Labour defences where small swings can gain them 30-40 seats. That is where the attack lines need to be.
This election is certainly turning weird. Philip Thompson now eulogising over our glorious contribution to the slave trade.
You accidentally missed a word.
I am eulogising over our glorious contribution to abolishing the slave trade.
Is that like the glory of a terrorist kidnapper releasing remaining hostages (having tortured them, and killed the others)?
A better move, yes. Better fortune for those who no longer have to suffer, yes.
But it's hard for one to see glory in ceasing to incarcerate, murder, and abuse humans (in this case for the earlier financial gain for an empire that still leaves many legacies, including a substantial element of the framework for control of land, human, and natural resources today).
Because you are a fool who is looking from today's standards.
Historically slavery was normal. Its in the Bible, its in every power historically. That the UK abolished it is absolutely unprecedented and remarkable. We only view slavery as being odd now precisely BECAUSE it was abolished by our predecessors, had we been born hundreds or thousands of years ago it would have been normal.
‘The past is a foreign country - they do things differently there’ - this seems to be lost on the modern thought police.
In living memory it was scandalous that my mum carried on working when she got married, and didn’t become a housewife. We have a proud role in the abolition of slavery in this country. Did we benefit before that? Almost certainly yes.
Views on race have massively changed in my own lifetime. When I went to university in Bradford my Nan opined if I would get a beautiful p-ki girlfriend. She wasn’t racist, she didn’t say it with any hate, in fact she said it in a way that thought it was somehow exotic and good. I was shocked at the language used but recognised the sentiment. Racist stereotypes existed in education - black kids are thick but Asian kids are clever, as if you can distinguish between economic circumstance and life chances.
The only way we can act now is to acknowledge it was wrong and move on
I'm not sure what you mean about trying to make Germans feel guilty? I find Germany to be one of the few countries to have a realistic view of its past, and would strongly welcome Britain adopting the same attitude. There is no nostalgia here for the German Overseas Empire that effectively ended in the First World War - which is the equivalent of the British Empire (the attempt to create a "Third Empire" in the 30s and 40s being a little different, although Hitler was inspired by the British Empire). No Germans are saying the German Empire was better than other empires - although you can certainly find literature from the 20s and 30s from German rightwing historians claiming exactly that, saying that German rule in places like German East Africa had been better than British, French or Belgian rule in their African colonies (citing, for example, the superior education system and, yes, the railways again). And arguing that it was terrible injustice that the former German colonies were effectively under the control of those countries. It's really striking how those arguments from German nationalists in the 20s sound exactly the same as current glorifiers of Britain's past.
If you want to feel proud of your country, feel proud of Goethe and Beethoven or Shakespeare and Darwin. Glorification of the history of violence is just ugly and dangerous.
I don't know if people here have read Inglorious Empire by Shashi Tharoor, but it opened my eyes to a lot of things. I was never an Empire defender, but still the British education system had taught me certain things about pre colonial India that were obviously false, and the concept of our Empire doing "good" is taken down point by point. The really interesting stuff looks into specific sectors where India was a world leader and how the English specifically regulated away those sectors (building boats being one) so that English manufacturing could monopolise a market, whilst at the same time crowing about free trade. V interesting read.
I wonder what polling leads the two parties would prefer in polling week? Labour would settle for a 12 or so lead, might make tories complacent or willing to go LD if remainy Tories might prefer 7 or 8, lead to a panic vote stampede to stop the Corbot
As James Forsyth indicated last night, the 7% lead last night is probably on the nail for the Tories - large enough not to panic the party, small enough to ensure there's little complacency among Tory voters. Problem is, the trend perhaps suggests a continued narrowing.
This election is certainly turning weird. Philip Thompson now eulogising over our glorious contribution to the slave trade.
You accidentally missed a word.
I am eulogising over our glorious contribution to abolishing the slave trade.
Is that like the glory of a terrorist kidnapper releasing remaining hostages (having tortured them, and killed the others)?
A better move, yes. Better fortune for those who no longer have to suffer, yes.
But it's hard for one to see glory in ceasing to incarcerate, murder, and abuse humans (in this case for the earlier financial gain for an empire that still leaves many legacies, including a substantial element of the framework for control of land, human, and natural resources today).
Because you are a fool who is looking from today's standards.
Historically slavery was normal. Its in the Bible, its in every power historically. That the UK abolished it is absolutely unprecedented and remarkable. We only view slavery as being odd now precisely BECAUSE it was abolished by our predecessors, had we been born hundreds or thousands of years ago it would have been normal.
"absolutely unprecedented" is absolutely wrong. plenty of countries abolished slavery before Britain.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act, there should shame in the society having allowed it to occur until that point.
(The only ones who can possibly celebrate are those freed, and those who brought it down, not the society that was forced to bring it down.)
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
Looks increasingly like Labour have moved into the low 30s. Tories holding at about 42, so if labour want to get it down to 5 or so they need to eat into the LD vote hard. I thi k the Tories would bank a 10 or 11 gap on the 12th now if offered!
Surely it depends on which seats the the Labour and Lib Dem votes are in. If Labour end up on 35% and the Lib Dems on 15% and that is spread evenly across the country then Johnson gets a big majority. If Labour's 35% are concentrated in seats they can win and the Lib Dem's 15% is concentrated in seats they can win then who knows?
Labour eating into the Lib Dem vote nationally won't benefit them at all if those votes are coming from places like Guildford, Cheltenham or Richmond. If they are in Con/Lab marginals, different story. Likewise Lib Dems could be as low as 10% and still pick up 40 seats if their votes are concentrated in the seats they can win.
The best hope specifically from a tactical objective of denying Bozo a majority is for the Labour vote to hold up (i.e. recover) in its own marginals while the torrent of LibDem leaflets in its targets ensures sufficient tactical voting to topple some from the Tories. Plus the SNP hold up in Scotland.
Mrs C, the Welsh are renowned for their English nationalism.
Also, why is that bad, whereas remaining due to, as you might phrase it, Scottish and Northern Irish nationalism would be a good thing?
Actually, Mr Dancer, I am not fond of any form of nationalism. The more virulent it is the less I like it. It is why a trans-national project such as the EU is so appealing to me
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
If Priti Patel is a "Liberal Conservative" we have departed this world and entered a new one with a different perspective on reality and a whole new language to go with it. Exciting!
Reality is being defenestrated via the Overton Window day by day.
She believes in hanging people humanely with a soft rope
It's a bit weird that those folk insisting that there won't be an indy ref II are wasting all this effort trying to game a definitely-not-happening indy ref II.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
Without the differences in turnout the Tories would be on 36 v Labour on 35 in the Kantar poll !
We can be pretty certain the Tories will be in the 40s. Leave vote is 46-52 points.
By that logic, can't you say that the Lib Dems will be in the 40s or 50s?
I would count the remain vote as all parties bar BXP and the Tories. Clearly most remainers will vote Labour. More remainers will vote Tory than leavers vote Labour I think (the polls support this). Assume Greens/SNP and Plaid are on 4-6 points then we have a range of 44-49 points for Lab/LD combined. At the moment I would say that split is currently around 34% Labour and 13% Lib Dems. if the Libs gets squeezed down to 10% or lower Labour will go high 30s which could be enough for NOM.
I can’t see the Tories going below low 40s without a black swan event as there is nowhere else for the leave vote to go realistically.
So the only chance of LibDems holding the balance of power, which is their raison d'etre and is the best chance of 2ndRef, is to be back down below 10%. They've literally been doing too well.* FPTP is fascinating.
*Of course I acknowledge that the prime failure of the LibDems is that they have failed to shift Con remainers.
This election is certainly turning weird. Philip Thompson now eulogising over our glorious contribution to the slave trade.
You accidentally missed a word.
I am eulogising over our glorious contribution to abolishing the slave trade.
Is that like the glory of a terrorist kidnapper releasing remaining hostages (having tortured them, and killed the others)?
A better move, yes. Better fortune for those who no longer have to suffer, yes.
But it's hard for one to see glory in ceasing to incarcerate, murder, and abuse humans (in this case for the earlier financial gain for an empire that still leaves many legacies, including a substantial element of the framework for control of land, human, and natural resources today).
Because you are a fool who is looking from today's standards.
Historically slavery was normal. Its in the Bible, its in every power historically. That the UK abolished it is absolutely unprecedented and remarkable. We only view slavery as being odd now precisely BECAUSE it was abolished by our predecessors, had we been born hundreds or thousands of years ago it would have been normal.
"absolutely unprecedented" is absolutely wrong. plenty of countries abolished slavery before Britain.
Name one country that abolished the slave trade before us. Not just within their country but using their power to prevent other nations from trading slaves too.
Interestingly, Wikipedia says that 'Slavery was first abolished by the French Republic in 1794, but Napoleon revoked that decree in 1802. In 1815, the Republic abolished the slave trade but the decree did not come into effect until 1826. France re-abolished slavery in her colonies in 1848 with a general and unconditional emancipation.'
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Or...
It was still at the stage of clubs and fists When that well known face got beaten to bits Your face was blue in the light of the screen As we watched the speech of an animal scream The new party army was marching right over our heads
(Boris' favourite band that he definitely didn't lie about.)
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
If Priti Patel is a "Liberal Conservative" we have departed this world and entered a new one with a different perspective on reality and a whole new language to go with it. Exciting!
What has she done in office that is illiberal?
And don't say the death penalty, she opposes the death penalty and hasn't introduced it while in office.
You must surely know she couldn't have introduced it because neither the EU nor parliament would have allowed her to. Whether she will try to if we leave the EU is moot. I trust you will support her either way.
This election is certainly turning weird. Philip Thompson now eulogising over our glorious contribution to the slave trade.
You accidentally missed a word.
I am eulogising over our glorious contribution to abolishing the slave trade.
Is that like the glory of a terrorist kidnapper releasing remaining hostages (having tortured them, and killed the others)?
A better move, yes. Better fortune for those who no longer have to suffer, yes.
But it's hard for one to see glory in ceasing to incarcerate, murder, and abuse humans (in this case for the earlier financial gain for an empire that still leaves many legacies, including a substantial element of the framework for control of land, human, and natural resources today).
Because you are a fool who is looking from today's standards.
Historically slavery was normal. Its in the Bible, its in every power historically. That the UK abolished it is absolutely unprecedented and remarkable. We only view slavery as being odd now precisely BECAUSE it was abolished by our predecessors, had we been born hundreds or thousands of years ago it would have been normal.
‘The past is a foreign country - they do things differently there’ - this seems to be lost on the modern thought police.
In living memory it was scandalous that my mum carried on working when she got married, and didn’t become a housewife. We have a proud role in the abolition of slavery in this country. Did we benefit before that? Almost certainly yes.
Views on race have massively changed in my own lifetime. When I went to university in Bradford my Nan opined if I would get a beautiful p-ki girlfriend. She wasn’t racist, she didn’t say it with any hate, in fact she said it in a way that thought it was somehow exotic and good. I was shocked at the language used but recognised the sentiment. Racist stereotypes existed in education - black kids are thick but Asian kids are clever, as if you can distinguish between economic circumstance and life chances.
The only way we can act now is to acknowledge it was wrong and move on
I would suggest that your Nan WAS racist. Your memory is almost a dictionary definition of casual racism.
Uncanny that it's always righty Brexiteers who assure everyone that their vision of Brexit has absolutely nothing to do with Empire nostalgia who are the loudest defenders of the BE and its veneration. Probably just a coincidence..
Not really.
People who don’t believe that the U.K. can be an independent force for good in the world are more likely to sublimate us in the EU.
I used U.K. because I would hate to understate the contribution of our brave Scottish brothers and sisters to the empire
So it's not really a coincidence? Ok. You're certainly right that I don’t believe that the U.K. governed by people like Johnson, Patel and Raab and in thrall to Trump can be an independent force for good in the world. These ****s would be hard pressed to be a force for good in their own back gardens.
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
Is the death penalty a liberal Conservative position?
Does Patel support the death penalty?
She did and defended it vehemently, although she claims to no longer hold that position. Her general attitude to crime is one of force, wanting criminals to feel "terror", rather than justice. I also feel the general conservative rhetoric around crime is purposefully authoritarian; no person is inherently a criminal, they commit criminal acts, some out of desperation, some out of greed. Whilst people have linked police numbers to crime (something there is no consensus for) we do not that poverty is linked to crime, which in my mind would suggest that most "criminals" are not doing it because of something wrong with them, but something wrong with the society they live in and an attempt to just survive. https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1198665587490263046
The Tories are trying to compensate for the erosion of their brand in regard to crime over the past few years by being heavy-handed now. Particularly as they are going after working class constituencies where views on crime and sentencing are, shall we say, a little to the right of tweeting barristers. Intellectually interesting policies lead to the sort of campaign disasters seen in 2017.
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
If Priti Patel is a "Liberal Conservative" we have departed this world and entered a new one with a different perspective on reality and a whole new language to go with it. Exciting!
What has she done in office that is illiberal?
And don't say the death penalty, she opposes the death penalty and hasn't introduced it while in office.
You must surely know she couldn't have introduced it because neither the EU nor parliament would have allowed her to. Whether she will try to if we leave the EU is moot
You skimmed past the fact she opposes the death penalty. Why would she introduce something she opposes?
Even after we leave the EU we will still be signed up the EHRC.
Looks increasingly like Labour have moved into the low 30s. Tories holding at about 42, so if labour want to get it down to 5 or so they need to eat into the LD vote hard. I thi k the Tories would bank a 10 or 11 gap on the 12th now if offered!
Surely it depends on which seats the the Labour and Lib Dem votes are in. If Labour end up on 35% and the Lib Dems on 15% and that is spread evenly across the country then Johnson gets a big majority. If Labour's 35% are concentrated in seats they can win and the Lib Dem's 15% is concentrated in seats they can win then who knows?
Labour eating into the Lib Dem vote nationally won't benefit them at all if those votes are coming from places like Guildford, Cheltenham or Richmond. If they are in Con/Lab marginals, different story. Likewise Lib Dems could be as low as 10% and still pick up 40 seats if their votes are concentrated in the seats they can win.
The best hope specifically from a tactical objective of denying Bozo a majority is for the Labour vote to hold up (i.e. recover) in its own marginals while the torrent of LibDem leaflets in its targets ensures sufficient tactical voting to topple some from the Tories. Plus the SNP hold up in Scotland.
This is correct. However at the start of the campaign many of us were expecting 40 Lib Dems. I would now say it will be closer to 20, so their influence over the result is certainly less.
At the moment the Lab to Tory swings would be enough for the blues to gain at least 40 seats in the Midlands and North, but this gap may close and no one knows for sure the effect the BXP will have.
Looks increasingly like Labour have moved into the low 30s. Tories holding at about 42, so if labour want to get it down to 5 or so they need to eat into the LD vote hard. I thi k the Tories would bank a 10 or 11 gap on the 12th now if offered!
Surely it depends on which seats the the Labour and Lib Dem votes are in. If Labour end up on 35% and the Lib Dems on 15% and that is spread evenly across the country then Johnson gets a big majority. If Labour's 35% are concentrated in seats they can win and the Lib Dem's 15% is concentrated in seats they can win then who knows?
Labour eating into the Lib Dem vote nationally won't benefit them at all if those votes are coming from places like Guildford, Cheltenham or Richmond. If they are in Con/Lab marginals, different story. Likewise Lib Dems could be as low as 10% and still pick up 40 seats if their votes are concentrated in the seats they can win.
The best hope specifically from a tactical objective of denying Bozo a majority is for the Labour vote to hold up (i.e. recover) in its own marginals while the torrent of LibDem leaflets in its targets ensures sufficient tactical voting to topple some from the Tories. Plus the SNP hold up in Scotland.
This is correct. However at the start of the campaign many of us were expecting 40 Lib Dems. I would now say it will be closer to 20, so their influence over the result is certainly less.
At the moment the Lab to Tory swings would be enough for the blues to gain at least 40 seats in the Midlands and North, but this gap may close and no one knows for sure the effect the BXP will have.
20 gains would put the Lib Dems into the 30s, that seems above predictions now.
If any of the Lib Dem gains come from Labour/SNP then that won't affect the Tory total or majority/non-majority.
Libdem gains:Richmond Park, Wimbeldon, Bermondsy, Hampstead and Kilburn and that's it
Con Gain: Kensington
Lab Gain: Putney
Probably not far off
I believe Labour are campaigning hard in Wimbledon which might take it out of Lib Dem hands by splitting the vote. The Libs came 3rd in 2017 and Hammond is a bit remainy which might be enough for a Tory hold.
O/T Yes I think that pretty well everyone agrees that in deepest London Remainia the LDs are in a position to pick up several Conservative seats, especially if tactical voting starts to kick in.
However, the opposite side to that coin is that the LDs must be at risk in the seats they hold that voted Leave. That's North Norfolk, Eastbourne and Carshalton, with Leave % votes of 58%, 57% and 56% respectively. I think all three are more likely than not to go Tory even assuming that the LDs pick up a half dozen or so in London. Of these, North Norfolk is the most likely to go blue, aided by Lamb standing down. Westmorland is another where the Leave/Remain vote is fairly evenly split, although I think Farron will hang on there. The betting odds are not properly reflecting the fact that these seats are in play - 6/4 on Con for N Norfolk with Paddy Power and Ladbrokes is good value.
The constituency polling we have has unfortunately been heavily biased towards the entirely untypical seats which the LDs might feel they are in contention against Con or Lab - 13 of the 18 constituencies with specific polling on the Wiki site. Yet there have been only three constituency polls in seats where Lab is under threat from the Conservatives, and none in seats where the LDs are vulnerable.
I always follow the Wulfrunian tips, so thank you for these.
I'm convinced that Lamb, who has been around Norfolk N for 30 years, must have had a large personal vote, which will dissipate.
I see your tip and think it is fair but 6/4 did cause me to do a double take. I've checked my bets from 2 weeks ago and I got 3/1 on Con Gain N Norfolk. So I'm doubly happy with your tip this morning.
I agree that North Norfolk is the most vulnerable, but Lamb is still a strong pull, even when he is not the candidate. My understanding from friends in the area is that the LD attack on the previous Conservative candidate (James Wild) for doing the chicken run despite coming from the North Norfolk seat, is having an impact. But it will be interesting with strong local candidates for LDs and Conservatives. Eastbourne and Carshalton are simply down to the campaigning skills of Lloyd and Brake. I would be amazed if Carshalton is not held comfortably. If Brake could hold in 15 and 17 he will not lose now. Eastbourne I gave up trying to understand a long time ago, but Lloyd is formidable. Westmorland is far more at risk than Carshalton but I agree is more likely to hold than not.
Looks increasingly like Labour have moved into the low 30s. Tories holding at about 42, so if labour want to get it down to 5 or so they need to eat into the LD vote hard. I thi k the Tories would bank a 10 or 11 gap on the 12th now if offered!
Surely it depends on which seats the the Labour and Lib Dem votes are in. If Labour end up on 35% and the Lib Dems on 15% and that is spread evenly across the country then Johnson gets a big majority. If Labour's 35% are concentrated in seats they can win and the Lib Dem's 15% is concentrated in seats they can win then who knows?
Labour eating into the Lib Dem vote nationally won't benefit them at all if those votes are coming from places like Guildford, Cheltenham or Richmond. If they are in Con/Lab marginals, different story. Likewise Lib Dems could be as low as 10% and still pick up 40 seats if their votes are concentrated in the seats they can win.
The best hope specifically from a tactical objective of denying Bozo a majority is for the Labour vote to hold up (i.e. recover) in its own marginals while the torrent of LibDem leaflets in its targets ensures sufficient tactical voting to topple some from the Tories. Plus the SNP hold up in Scotland.
This is correct. However at the start of the campaign many of us were expecting 40 Lib Dems. I would now say it will be closer to 20, so their influence over the result is certainly less.
At the moment the Lab to Tory swings would be enough for the blues to gain at least 40 seats in the Midlands and North, but this gap may close and no one knows for sure the effect the BXP will have.
20 gains would put the Lib Dems into the 30s, that seems above predictions now.
If any of the Lib Dem gains come from Labour/SNP then that won't affect the Tory total or majority/non-majority.
I mean 20 MPs rather than 20 gains. Most of the defectors will lose and I'm struggling to see more than 12 gains in total from Labour and the Tories.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
I would agree that we should celebrate the cessation.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful. Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
Bloody hell On @BBCr4today@bbcnickrobinson said he’d had a call from @UKLabour asking him to make clear that they hadn’t forgotten antisemitism in their press release on racism, it was mentioned in the notes to editors This is awful stuff #GeneralElection19
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
I would agree that we should celebrate the cessation.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful. Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
It is entirely relevant.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
Wikipedia's 'Timeline of abolition of slavery and serfdom' suggests that at various times throughout recorded history attitudes towards slavery and abolition have varied from place to place.
One is reminded of the debate in an Oxford College, when new investment was being discussed, and the Economics don suggested buying land, as, for the 'past five hundred years land has proved a good investment'. The History don objected on the grounds that, 'in the scale of human history, the past five hundred years have been quite exceptional!'
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
If Priti Patel is a "Liberal Conservative" we have departed this world and entered a new one with a different perspective on reality and a whole new language to go with it. Exciting!
What has she done in office that is illiberal?
And don't say the death penalty, she opposes the death penalty and hasn't introduced it while in office.
Haha, that is really funny. Other than supporting the highly unliberal and xenophobic policy of national self harm, aka Brexit, she has not really had the ability to do anything illiberal yet as she is/was part of a minority government
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
I'm not sure what you mean about trying to make Germans feel guilty? I find Germany to be one of the few countries to have a realistic view of its past, and would strongly welcome Britain adopting the same attitude. There is no nostalgia here for the German Overseas Empire that effectively ended in the First World War - which is the equivalent of the British Empire (the attempt to create a "Third Empire" in the 30s and 40s being a little different, although Hitler was inspired by the British Empire). No Germans are saying the German Empire was better than other empires - although you can certainly find literature from the 20s and 30s from German rightwing historians claiming exactly that, saying that German rule in places like German East Africa had been better than British, French or Belgian rule in their African colonies (citing, for example, the superior education system and, yes, the railways again). And arguing that it was terrible injustice that the former German colonies were effectively under the control of those countries. It's really striking how those arguments from German nationalists in the 20s sound exactly the same as current glorifiers of Britain's past.
If you want to feel proud of your country, feel proud of Goethe and Beethoven or Shakespeare and Darwin. Glorification of the history of violence is just ugly and dangerous.
I don't know if people here have read Inglorious Empire by Shashi Tharoor, but it opened my eyes to a lot of things. I was never an Empire defender, but still the British education system had taught me certain things about pre colonial India that were obviously false, and the concept of our Empire doing "good" is taken down point by point. The really interesting stuff looks into specific sectors where India was a world leader and how the English specifically regulated away those sectors (building boats being one) so that English manufacturing could monopolise a market, whilst at the same time crowing about free trade. V interesting read.
Just requested from County Library service.
Be aware that Shashi Tharoor is far from an objective source.
He’s a highly controversial Indian politician with his own agenda and has a history of making highly emotive and incendiary statements.
He was charged last year with abatement to the suicide of his wife and marital cruelty.
IMHO the current best bet I've noticed on offer right now is Plaid under 4.5 seats at 4/6 with ladbrokes. They are only really in contention in 5 seats. I just cant seem them taking Llanelli, Blaneau or Rhondda. So to get to 5 they need to hold all their 4 plus gain Ynys Mon. If you think they'll take that you can get 8/11 with bet365. But they arent even favourites to hold Ceredigion. To get both is I think at best 60% x 50%=30%. I'd want over 5/2 to tempt me with the over 4.5. And better than 1/2 for the under. 4/6 I think is real value but DYOR.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
I would agree that we should celebrate the cessation.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful. Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
It is entirely relevant.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
Name one person whose farts smell better than mine!
Or name 2 countries that traded more slaves than Britain!
According to Wikipedia the Qin Dynasty abolished slavery in the 3rd Century BC, to pick an early example. You claimed abolishing slavery was "absolutely unprecedented", now you want a power "comparable to the British Empire" whatever that means (surely there was never any empire comparable to the glorious British one?). so no longer "absolutely unprecedented", I guess?
I would also suggest that the British Empire was the first power that had any realistic means of attempting to stop the slave trade around the world, due to it, you know, having already invaded so many countries around the world...
Dyedwoolies exciting placard update for Norwich South The greens have finally got round to placarding, but bugger all compared to their usual presence. They arent bothering and have sent a single, boring and prosaic leaflet. Lib dem diamonds nowhere to be seen and as usual, tories keeping very quiet. Labour have reasonable coverage but nothing like the usual amount. No more than the euros round my way for example and not much elsewhere. I dont think anyone is up for it, so unless the Tories pull off an under radar miracle Lewis will hold this with 50% plus and the LDs and Greens will be nowhere with the blues taking 25%. No evidence of a labour collapse here, perhaps a lack of enthusiasm however.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
I would agree that we should celebrate the cessation.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful. Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
It is entirely relevant.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Do you specifically have ancestors that did this?
Probably. Collectively our ancestors as Brits did that.
I've not traced back my ancestry 4 centuries. Going back 4 centuries we have an estimated 65,536 ancestors in that generation so certainly one or more of them could have been involved.
I think liberal Conservatives like Johnson and [I think] Patel definitely can be an independent force for good in the world. Raab I'm not fussed about.
Its noteworthy that contrary to all the stink raised about her Patel has been in the Home Office liberalising things not being more authoritarian than her predecessors.
If Priti Patel is a "Liberal Conservative" we have departed this world and entered a new one with a different perspective on reality and a whole new language to go with it. Exciting!
She's the right age to be Roy Jenkins's lovechild. I think that's the limit of Priti's liberal credentials.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to perpetuate thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was bad of our ancestors to do - don't you?
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
Sorry to hear it continued. We are in a very dark place as a country at present
As far as Boris is concerned I think it is widely accepted the conservatives will be the largest party and will have first attempt at governing either as a minority or c & s. The only way Boris could survive would be to agree a referendum on his deal with the lib dems otherwise we either see another deadlock or worse another GE while we crash out with no deal on the 31st January
Has that been dropped? If so, I suspect it went down poorly in the focus groups. Many commuters are sympathetic to the staff, seeing them as heroically battling the mean and greedy rail bosses. Boris was endanger of looking like the bosses' stooge.
There has clearly been a move to Labour. Whether this is a blip, and whether the Chief Rabbi's foray into partisan party politics will hurt, I don't know. It may take another handful of days.
What I would say is that Johnson is rubbish in front of camera. Corbyn, by contrast, looks really assured. This is where the damage is occurring.
"How do you tell the difference between an antisemite and a relentless, monotonous, irrational denier, mitigator and defender of antisemitism?"
"I don't know. How do you tell the difference between an antisemite and a relentless, monotonous, irrational denier, mitigator and defender of antisemitism?"
You don't seem able to take the most basic steps to ensure you know what you are talking about.
You do realise you've just illustrated what was said in the comment you replied to: "Every time someone dares question why it's anti-semitic, it's not answered."?
Why not answer it?
I have shown that he hasn't the first idea what he is talking about (over the freemasonry point). But read this, if you are really in doubt (and I would bet the farm you aren't)
And if you still disagree take it up with Corbyn. He says it's antisemitic. Why would he say that?
"I sincerely regret that I did not look more closely at the image I was commenting on, the contents of which are deeply disturbing and anti-Semitic." Jeremy Corbyn
So apparently the mural's anti-Semitic because people say it is, and then other people are compelled to say it is (eg Corbyn).
For questioning all this, I'm now also an 'anti-Semite'.
This is a dystopian Emperor's New Clothes scenario. Quite scary.
@Ishmael_Z made one good point about the connection some anti-Semites use to try and tar Jews with the hostility towards Freemasons.
However, still no explanation why the mural is anti-semitic.
Yes, Corbyn now believes the mural is anti-Semitic. That doesn't answer the question at all.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to perpetuate thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was bad of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Yes I have already said I think humanity for thousands and thousands of years engaging in the slave trade was bad. The fact it always occured for thousands of years means I doubt there is a single person on the entire planet who doesn't have an ancestor who engaged in the slave trade.
A history of slavery occuring within humanity is something we all share. Every single human, black or white, western or eastern, poor or rich. For thousands and thousands of years humans traded slaves. That was bad.
Its ending is what is remarkable, not that it occured. That is what is unique. That is what is good.
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
Did someone on here really say that?
Mysticrose did and justified it on the basis they spent lots of time with jews and we should totes listen to them on this
1. The surge in new registrations: 2.8 million since the election was called, which is 1 million more than last time at the comparable point, is bad news for the tories. The majority are youngsters.
2. I don't think the majority in this country live in Johnson's worldview. That doesn't mean we live in Corbyn's either. But it's also bad news for the tories.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to perpetuate thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was bad of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to perpetuate thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was bad of our ancestors to do - don't you?
I don't know, but since around half of my ancestors were from the SE Midlands and in the 18th C Non-conformists, I can reasonably suspect that with some effort I'd be able to find someone who was in Cromwell's army at Drogheda. I'm sure I could also find someone from the other side who was active in the Trade Union movement in the S Welsh coalfields.
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
Did someone on here really say that?
Mysticrose did and justified it on the basis they spent lots of time with jews and we should totes listen to them on this
Actually I posted a very astute, thoroughly informed and intellectually compelling, reason why the 'Jewish community' need to tread very cautiously.
If you want to engage with this on the same level, go back to what I posted this morning and join me. Otherwise, your comments are water off my back.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to perpetuate thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was bad of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Yes I have already said I think humanity for thousands and thousands of years engaging in the slave trade was bad. The fact it always occured for thousands of years means I doubt there is a single person on the entire planet who doesn't have an ancestor who engaged in the slave trade.
A history of slavery occuring within humanity is something we all share. Every single human, black or white, western or eastern, poor or rich. For thousands and thousands of years humans traded slaves. That was bad.
Its ending is what is remarkable, not that it occured. That is what is unique. That is what is good.
I agree. Let's celebrate that the scourge was ended.
But let's not glorify *our society* for having ended it's horrific practice (the fruits of which it still hugely benefits from, til this day).
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
Did someone on here really say that?
@Mysticrose on page 2 said that Jews trying to make themselves a special case caused antisemitism.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
I would agree that we should celebrate the cessation.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful. Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
It is entirely relevant.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Do you specifically have ancestors that did this?
Probably. Collectively our ancestors as Brits did that.
I've not traced back my ancestry 4 centuries. Going back 4 centuries we have an estimated 65,536 ancestors in that generation so certainly one or more of them could have been involved.
65,536 you say? So you think in 16 generations not a single one of your ancestors was the result of distant cousins getting together? I think your maths is as dodgy as your history.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
I would agree that we should celebrate the cessation.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful. Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
It is entirely relevant.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Do you specifically have ancestors that did this?
Probably. Collectively our ancestors as Brits did that.
I've not traced back my ancestry 4 centuries. Going back 4 centuries we have an estimated 65,536 ancestors in that generation so certainly one or more of them could have been involved.
I'd imagine statistically that you (and I) are more likely to have an ancestor that was involved in or benefitted from the slave trade than actively fought it. I don't really have a problem with that as I don't believe in some kind of genetic national virtue or vice passed down the centuries. For you mystical British/English/whateverthefuckyouare nationalists it may be more problematic.
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
Did someone on here really say that?
Mysticrose did and justified it on the basis they spent lots of time with jews and we should totes listen to them on this
Actually I posted a very astute, thoroughly informed and intellectually compelling, reason why the 'Jewish community' need to tread very cautiously.
If you want to engage with this on the same level, go back to what I posted this morning and join me. Otherwise, your comments are water off my back.
"Jewsish(sic) people do NOT want to appear to be 'special.' That's just what has landed them in trouble before."
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to perpetuate thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was bad of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Yes I have already said I think humanity for thousands and thousands of years engaging in the slave trade was bad. The fact it always occured for thousands of years means I doubt there is a single person on the entire planet who doesn't have an ancestor who engaged in the slave trade.
A history of slavery occuring within humanity is something we all share. Every single human, black or white, western or eastern, poor or rich. For thousands and thousands of years humans traded slaves. That was bad.
Its ending is what is remarkable, not that it occured. That is what is unique. That is what is good.
I agree. Let's celebrate that the scourge was ended.
But let's not glorify *our society* for having ended it's horrific practice (the fruits of which it still hugely benefits from, til this day).
I think that's as close to the middle as we can reach.
We both agree to celebrate that the scourge was ended. I want us to remember and be please that we were the ones who ended the scourge, you don't, but lets just celebrate that the scourge was ended either way.
A proper reading of history needs to be able to see the good and the bad.
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
Did someone on here really say that?
Mysticrose did and justified it on the basis they spent lots of time with jews and we should totes listen to them on this
Actually I posted a very astute, thoroughly informed and intellectually compelling, reason why the 'Jewish community' need to tread very cautiously.
If you want to engage with this on the same level, go back to what I posted this morning and join me. Otherwise, your comments are water off my back.
'Need to tread very cautiously' ffs listen to yourself
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Good Morning Big G.
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking. To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
Did someone on here really say that?
@Mysticrose on page 2 said that Jews trying to make themselves a special case caused antisemitism.
No it doesn't 'cause' it but it certainly is fuel on the fire.
Just engage your brain for a second and think about why that's the case.
When I was immersed in Israeli life, living with Jewish families, the point was driven home to me, compellingly.
'Making us out to be special is precisely where the root of the problem began,' they argued with me. 'We are not special, and nor is the form of racism used against us. It has a distinctive history, of course, and a harrowing one, but it doesn't set us apart. The moment we do that, we play into the racists' hands - we give them the very thing they desire.'
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to perpetuate thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was bad of our ancestors to do - don't you?
I don't know, but since around half of my ancestors were from the SE Midlands and in the 18th C Non-conformists, I can reasonably suspect that with some effort I'd be able to find someone who was in Cromwell's army at Drogheda. I'm sure I could also find someone from the other side who was active in the Trade Union movement in the S Welsh coalfields.
My ancestors were farmers in Co. Armagh or Co. Donegal so not exactly big areas for the slave industry.
Actually, the French (aka The Normans) abolished slavery in 1100 after the Norman conquest.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
I would agree that we should celebrate the cessation.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful. Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
It is entirely relevant.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Do you specifically have ancestors that did this?
Probably. Collectively our ancestors as Brits did that.
I've not traced back my ancestry 4 centuries. Going back 4 centuries we have an estimated 65,536 ancestors in that generation so certainly one or more of them could have been involved.
65,536 you say? So you think in 16 generations not a single one of your ancestors was the result of distant cousins getting together? I think your maths is as dodgy as your history.
I said estimated. Of course not all were unique, nor were all generations exactly 20 years, many would have been more and many would have been less.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Some of them did.
And they didn't "end thousands of years of slave trade" - rather banned in in British colonies and on British vessels - and slavery itself was not abolished in the colonies for another quarter century (partly as the industrial revolution had rendered in economically unnecessary to us).
And some of us, of course, funded the Confederacy in the Civil War three decades later.
No it doesn't 'cause' it but it certainly is fuel on the fire.
Just engage your brain for a second and think about why that's the case.
When I was immersed in Israeli life, living with Jewish families, the point was driven home to me, compellingly.
'Making us out to be special is precisely where the root of the problem began,' they argued with me. 'We are not special, and nor is the form of racism used against us. It has a distinctive history, of course, and a harrowing one, but it doesn't set us apart. The moment we do that, we play into the racists' hands - we give them the very thing they desire.'
I'm right. Or rather, they were.
I think that's a cracking line to take. You should see if you can get Corbyn to use it. That'll shut everyone up about antisemitism for sure.
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act.
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'. Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
We should glorify the cessation of an appalling act. I am glad that the Nazis were defeated.
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
I would agree that we should celebrate the cessation.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful. Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
It is entirely relevant.
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
Do you specifically have ancestors that did this?
Probably. Collectively our ancestors as Brits did that.
I've not traced back my ancestry 4 centuries. Going back 4 centuries we have an estimated 65,536 ancestors in that generation so certainly one or more of them could have been involved.
I'd imagine statistically that you (and I) are more likely to have an ancestor that was involved in or benefitted from the slave trade than actively fought it. I don't really have a problem with that as I don't believe in some kind of genetic national virtue or vice passed down the centuries. For you mystical British/English/whateverthefuckyouare nationalists it may be more problematic.
I think you missed the fact I said that I suspect every single human on the planet has an ancestor who was involved in or benefited from the slave trade.
Comments
If Scotland wants to make independent decisions there is only one way to do that - they need to be an independent country outside the EU.
I can’t see the Tories going below low 40s without a black swan event as there is nowhere else for the leave vote to go realistically.
I'm convinced that Lamb, who has been around Norfolk N for 30 years, must have had a large personal vote, which will dissipate.
I see your tip and think it is fair but 6/4 did cause me to do a double take. I've checked my bets from 2 weeks ago and I got 3/1 on Con Gain N Norfolk. So I'm doubly happy with your tip this morning.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/28/antisemitism-open-your-eyes-jeremy-corbyn-labour
And if you still disagree take it up with Corbyn. He says it's antisemitic. Why would he say that?
Are you sure that you're English (or whatever confused, UK-centred identity you're adopting today)?
Labour eating into the Lib Dem vote nationally won't benefit them at all if those votes are coming from places like Guildford, Cheltenham or Richmond. If they are in Con/Lab marginals, different story. Likewise Lib Dems could be as low as 10% and still pick up 40 seats if their votes are concentrated in the seats they can win.
It's intellectually lazy and grossly manipulative to infer I'm anti-semitic from my last post.
Fairly, or not, Freemasonry is more frequently associated with a secretive network of elites controlling decisions and resources, at the expense of the populous.
So, in the context of this mural, which attacks banking cartels (regardless of religion) and portrays mainly non-Jewish bankers, there's no *apparent* anti-Semitism, and it's disingenuous to contort it to try and weaponize it so.
Freemasonry is not based on Judaism nor is is Jewish or Zionist. Jews were not allowed to join many masonic lodges for decades. Regardless, anti-Semites (including Hitler) have tried to link Jews with freemasonry to attack them. But the context of the mural and what it depicts is what is relevant here and to any observer of it.
Also, why is that bad, whereas remaining due to, as you might phrase it, Scottish and Northern Irish nationalism would be a good thing?
43% firm would be good, if 2017 had never happened.
In living memory it was scandalous that my mum carried on working when she got married, and didn’t become a housewife. We have a proud role in the abolition of slavery in this country. Did we benefit before that? Almost certainly yes.
Views on race have massively changed in my own lifetime. When I went to university in Bradford my Nan opined if I would get a beautiful p-ki girlfriend. She wasn’t racist, she didn’t say it with any hate, in fact she said it in a way that thought it was somehow exotic and good. I was shocked at the language used but recognised the sentiment. Racist stereotypes existed in education - black kids are thick but Asian kids are clever, as if you can distinguish between economic circumstance and life chances.
The only way we can act now is to acknowledge it was wrong and move on
And 'If you want to feel proud of your country, feel proud of Goethe and Beethoven or Shakespeare and Darwin.' One of the, if not the, best posted 'thoughts for today'!
And don't say the death penalty, she opposes the death penalty and hasn't introduced it while in office.
I also feel the general conservative rhetoric around crime is purposefully authoritarian; no person is inherently a criminal, they commit criminal acts, some out of desperation, some out of greed. Whilst people have linked police numbers to crime (something there is no consensus for) we do not that poverty is linked to crime, which in my mind would suggest that most "criminals" are not doing it because of something wrong with them, but something wrong with the society they live in and an attempt to just survive.
https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1198665587490263046
I hope things have calmed down since last night's display of intolerance, anger and bitterness which was very depressing
On the recent polls, including Kantar, labour do seem to have ticked up a couple of points and the conservatives seem to be settling above 40%. I think the waspi bribe has helped labour but to close the circa 11 point gap they are going to need to depress the lib dem vote and attract some conservatives which is unlikely
I have never subscribed to the landslide theory as there are too many moving parts but a small conservative majority may be the end result, but equally a hung parliament with Boris having to face the decision of accepting a referendum to remain in power and keep Corbyn out
'O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive' Sir Walter Scott 1808
Beyond that with no BXP the Tories are going to be getting 40% minimum in pretty much all their held seats where the Libs have aspirations. How many Lib Dem targets are there where they are capable of getting over 40%? I would argue 15 max and they certainly won't win all of them.
The Tories will realise the Libs won't be the ones responsible for them not getting a majority, it will be the failure to take Labour defences where small swings can gain them 30-40 seats. That is where the attack lines need to be.
https://twitter.com/twlldun/status/1199023925650432001
My post is to say that we should not glorify the cessation of an appalling act.
We should be ashamed of the appalling act having happened.
Your point that appalling acts were normalized - that's true, of some societies/parts of society at that time. That does not impact my point that there should not be glory in ceasing a horrific act, there should shame in the society having allowed it to occur until that point.
(The only ones who can possibly celebrate are those freed, and those who brought it down, not the society that was forced to bring it down.)
It's also not a binary issue of 'this used to be ok' and 'now it's not'.
Slavery was never ok to large portions of the world's populations.
You seem to be 'a fool who is looking from' the western standards of the time, when the world is and was full of societies with very different standards.
https://twitter.com/LeaskyHT/status/1199265328846512128?s=20
We should ALSO be ashamed of humanity that for thousands and thousands of years slavery was considered normal. We helped end that, that is good.
Name any world power ever prior to the British Empire that is comparable to the British Empire that had either abolished slavery or had a better record than us on slavery.
FPTP is fascinating.
*Of course I acknowledge that the prime failure of the LibDems is that they have failed to shift Con remainers.
It was still at the stage of clubs and fists
When that well known face got beaten to bits
Your face was blue in the light of the screen
As we watched the speech of an animal scream
The new party army was marching right over our heads
(Boris' favourite band that he definitely didn't lie about.)
Even after we leave the EU we will still be signed up the EHRC.
At the moment the Lab to Tory swings would be enough for the blues to gain at least 40 seats in the Midlands and North, but this gap may close and no one knows for sure the effect the BXP will have.
Libdem gains:Richmond Park, Wimbeldon, Bermondsy, Hampstead and Kilburn and that's it
Con Gain: Kensington
Lab Gain: Putney
If any of the Lib Dem gains come from Labour/SNP then that won't affect the Tory total or majority/non-majority.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexit/boris-johnson-to-curb-legal-challenges-over-brexit-in-extraordinary-attack-on-the-courts/ar-BBXkb0I?ocid=spartanntp
I believe Labour are campaigning hard in Wimbledon which might take it out of Lib Dem hands by splitting the vote. The Libs came 3rd in 2017 and Hammond is a bit remainy which might be enough for a Tory hold.
It might seem a trifling distinction, but I would suggest its important.
Celebrating the cessation of the act, and what that means, is useful.
Glorifying [a society] for having ended an appalling act is quite different.
Whether or not other world powers did the same as the British Empire to abolish slavery is not relevant to that point.
Bloody hell
On @BBCr4today @bbcnickrobinson said he’d had a call from @UKLabour asking him to make clear that they hadn’t forgotten antisemitism in their press release on racism, it was mentioned in the notes to editors
This is awful stuff
#GeneralElection19
Our brave ancestors fought and some lost their lives to end thousands of years of slave trade. I think that was good of our ancestors to do - don't you?
It didn't calm down. I've seen jaw dropping justifications for antisemitism, not least that the Jews are to blame for anti-semitism by way of their special pleading. Shocking.
To your point about the Boris minority: Surely the days of any party cooperating with the tories are over?
One is reminded of the debate in an Oxford College, when new investment was being discussed, and the Economics don suggested buying land, as, for the 'past five hundred years land has proved a good investment'.
The History don objected on the grounds that, 'in the scale of human history, the past five hundred years have been quite exceptional!'
Go get the oldies to register to vote!
He’s a highly controversial Indian politician with his own agenda and has a history of making highly emotive and incendiary statements.
He was charged last year with abatement to the suicide of his wife and marital cruelty.
IMHO the current best bet I've noticed on offer right now is Plaid under 4.5 seats at 4/6 with ladbrokes. They are only really in contention in 5 seats. I just cant seem them taking Llanelli, Blaneau or Rhondda. So to get to 5 they need to hold all their 4 plus gain Ynys Mon. If you think they'll take that you can get 8/11 with bet365. But they arent even favourites to hold Ceredigion. To get both is I think at best 60% x 50%=30%. I'd want over 5/2 to tempt me with the over 4.5. And better than 1/2 for the under. 4/6 I think is real value but DYOR.
Or name 2 countries that traded more slaves than Britain!
According to Wikipedia the Qin Dynasty abolished slavery in the 3rd Century BC, to pick an early example. You claimed abolishing slavery was "absolutely unprecedented", now you want a power "comparable to the British Empire" whatever that means (surely there was never any empire comparable to the glorious British one?). so no longer "absolutely unprecedented", I guess?
I would also suggest that the British Empire was the first power that had any realistic means of attempting to stop the slave trade around the world, due to it, you know, having already invaded so many countries around the world...
The greens have finally got round to placarding, but bugger all compared to their usual presence. They arent bothering and have sent a single, boring and prosaic leaflet. Lib dem diamonds nowhere to be seen and as usual, tories keeping very quiet. Labour have reasonable coverage but nothing like the usual amount. No more than the euros round my way for example and not much elsewhere. I dont think anyone is up for it, so unless the Tories pull off an under radar miracle Lewis will hold this with 50% plus and the LDs and Greens will be nowhere with the blues taking 25%.
No evidence of a labour collapse here, perhaps a lack of enthusiasm however.
I've not traced back my ancestry 4 centuries. Going back 4 centuries we have an estimated 65,536 ancestors in that generation so certainly one or more of them could have been involved.
As far as Boris is concerned I think it is widely accepted the conservatives will be the largest party and will have first attempt at governing either as a minority or c & s. The only way Boris could survive would be to agree a referendum on his deal with the lib dems otherwise we either see another deadlock or worse another GE while we crash out with no deal on the 31st January
All very bleak
What I would say is that Johnson is rubbish in front of camera. Corbyn, by contrast, looks really assured. This is where the damage is occurring.
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1199243646324953088?s=20
For questioning all this, I'm now also an 'anti-Semite'.
This is a dystopian Emperor's New Clothes scenario. Quite scary.
@Ishmael_Z made one good point about the connection some anti-Semites use to try and tar Jews with the hostility towards Freemasons.
However, still no explanation why the mural is anti-semitic.
Yes, Corbyn now believes the mural is anti-Semitic. That doesn't answer the question at all.
P.s. you assume that I'm male!
A history of slavery occuring within humanity is something we all share. Every single human, black or white, western or eastern, poor or rich. For thousands and thousands of years humans traded slaves. That was bad.
Its ending is what is remarkable, not that it occured. That is what is unique. That is what is good.
1. The surge in new registrations: 2.8 million since the election was called, which is 1 million more than last time at the comparable point, is bad news for the tories. The majority are youngsters.
2. I don't think the majority in this country live in Johnson's worldview. That doesn't mean we live in Corbyn's either. But it's also bad news for the tories.
https://news.sky.com/story/george-the-poet-turns-down-mbe-over-pure-evil-of-british-empire-11870478
I'm sure I could also find someone from the other side who was active in the Trade Union movement in the S Welsh coalfields.
If you want to engage with this on the same level, go back to what I posted this morning and join me. Otherwise, your comments are water off my back.
But let's not glorify *our society* for having ended it's horrific practice (the fruits of which it still hugely benefits from, til this day).
We both agree to celebrate that the scourge was ended. I want us to remember and be please that we were the ones who ended the scourge, you don't, but lets just celebrate that the scourge was ended either way.
A proper reading of history needs to be able to see the good and the bad.
Just engage your brain for a second and think about why that's the case.
When I was immersed in Israeli life, living with Jewish families, the point was driven home to me, compellingly.
'Making us out to be special is precisely where the root of the problem began,' they argued with me. 'We are not special, and nor is the form of racism used against us. It has a distinctive history, of course, and a harrowing one, but it doesn't set us apart. The moment we do that, we play into the racists' hands - we give them the very thing they desire.'
I'm right. Or rather, they were.
Actually, the French (aka The Normans) abolished slavery in 1100 after the Norman conquest.
And they didn't "end thousands of years of slave trade" - rather banned in in British colonies and on British vessels - and slavery itself was not abolished in the colonies for another quarter century (partly as the industrial revolution had rendered in economically unnecessary to us).
And some of us, of course, funded the Confederacy in the Civil War three decades later.