From last thread: Reply to Casino Royale on veganism:
It is not often I am in agreement with you CR, but I am on this. Veganism is the equivalent of evangelical fundamentalist religion. It's advocates give the impression of believing themselves to be morally superior to the rest of the human race, and some are highly militant, objectionable and sometimes violent.
It is also highly questionable as to whether veganism is "sustainable" from an environmental perspective. A wholesale move to the production of vegan produce would have to destroy many ecosystems that depend on grazing, and would make genuine organic production largely unviable. It would also almost certainly lead to mass starvation if it were possible to immediately implement. Veganism is a fad for self righteous eccentrics.
The question I've never heard a vegetarian/vegan answer is what they expect to happen to all the animals we farm if overnight people stopped eating meat?
Do they expect farmers to relinquish their fields and let sheep and cows spend the rest of their days naturally grazing until they die of old age? Or would there be a mass slaughter of all the sheep and cows as the farmers look to change their fields over to whatever the vegan/vegetarian populace want to eat?
I expect it is the latter and I don't see how that would be any better. So I'm going to continue eating meat - to avoid a mass slaughter of animals.
The other day I found myself considering vegetarianism for the first time. It was after I saw a video of a truly revolting halal slaughterhouse, I think in India or Pakistan. The treatment of the animals was harrowing. Obscene. I won’t even link to the vid, it’s too upsetting. You can find it on Twitter if you want.
I haven’t made the leap to vegetarianism yet. Might never do so. But I am now taking much greater care to find out where my meat comes from. If I can’t be sure, I won’t buy it or eat it.
I can do this because I am wealthy. I know it is difficult if you’re not.
Long term the future must be lab grown meat, cruelty free. Until we get there one of the easy and necessary things we have to do is ban non-stun halal and kosher slaughter. It is vile.
Labour are rising in the south and the tories rising in the north = Tory landslide
It's possible the Tories have a number of potential voters who will vote Conservative if they think there's a chance of Corbyn becoming PM even though the party is their second preference, but who'll otherwise vote for other parties if they think the Tories are heading for a comfortable win. Of course that limits the chances of a big Tory landslide.
Re veganism, if enforced I declare i would become a poacher and hunter of rabbits and birds and a stealth fisherman so, ya know, the rozzers better mark me up now. Extinction rebellion - spackers. Does anyone support these cretins? Ian Lavery - his late attempt to make himself a pantomime villain = watch Wansbeck
You are aware of the origins of the word "spacker"?
Same as the origin of the word spaz I'd guess. Both now used in a mocking way to denote idiots. Similar migration of language that means 'gay' as an insult does not mean 'homosexual'
Kids under 16 do not understand the pejorative usage of the word ‘gay’. It’s fallen out of fashion. True story.
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Labour are rising in the south and the tories rising in the north = Tory landslide
It's possible the Tories have a number of potential voters who will vote Conservative if they think there's a chance of Corbyn becoming PM even though the party is their second preference, but who'll otherwise vote for other parties if they think the Tories are heading for a comfortable win. Of course that limits the chances of a big Tory landslide.
Thankfully some are giving the impression it is a dead heat.
Given the figures in this paper on efficiency (yes, one paper from quick google, I'm sure other papers will have different figures) you'd need an awful lot of current pasture land not suitable for anything else: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/10/105002
To be clear though, I'm not advocating total veganism. I'm not a vegan, I eat meat (although not a great deal, probably twice per week on average, although it varies).
I think us meat eaters should be grateful to the vegetarians and vegans out there for increasing our share (by decreasing theirs) of the global sustainable budget for meat production ;-)
I read somewhere - and it has a ring of truth about it - that a non trivial cause of global warming is the methane produced by the farting and burping of cows. There are 1.5 billion of them in the world and each one farts and burps dozens of times a day. That's a lot of gas. OK, so the same applies to people and there are 7.7 billion of them. However, the fart or burp of a cow is several times richer in methane than that of a human.
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
Left to their own devices on a farm? Sure they would. They're rather content animals that live a happy life until they get turned into a delicious steak. Its the circle of life.
If the farmer needed their grazing land back to provide for vegan food though what do you think would happen to them? Would they be allowed to graze or would they be slaughtered?
I didn't see the documentary, but perhaps the cattle left to their own devices are those at Knepp, which was formerly an intensive arable farm?
As it happens I'm about half-way through Isabella Tree's book on this. It is absolutely fascinating, and also superbly well written - she manages to weave quite a complex set of strands of the story and science into a beautiful and thought-provoking narrative. Very highly recommended - put it on your Xmas list!
Most dairy and pork and beef farmers I know (I live in a rural area, and we usually stay on a farm in Devon over the NY break) are very emotional and caring to their livestock herds.
Yes, it’s a business and a livelihood but they also have compassion for their animals too.
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
"Oh yes, I'm the Great Pretender Just laughing and GAY like a clown"
From last thread: Reply to Casino Royale on veganism:
It is not often I am in agreement with you CR, but I am on this. Veganism is the equivalent of evangelical fundamentalist religion. It's advocates give the impression of believing themselves to be morally superior to the rest of the human race, and some are highly militant, objectionable and sometimes violent.
It is also highly questionable as to whether veganism is "sustainable" from an environmental perspective. A wholesale move to the production of vegan produce would have to destroy many ecosystems that depend on grazing, and would make genuine organic production largely unviable. It would also almost certainly lead to mass starvation if it were possible to immediately implement. Veganism is a fad for self righteous eccentrics.
The question I've never heard a vegetarian/vegan answer is what they expect to happen to all the animals we farm if overnight people stopped eating meat?
Do they expect farmers to relinquish their fields and let sheep and cows spend the rest of their days naturally grazing until they die of old age? Or would there be a mass slaughter of all the sheep and cows as the farmers look to change their fields over to whatever the vegan/vegetarian populace want to eat?
I expect it is the latter and I don't see how that would be any better. So I'm going to continue eating meat - to avoid a mass slaughter of animals.
There is an interesting section in Steven Pinker's latest book about this. Basically if we follow the eco-facists demands, massive reduction in meat, no GM, going back to "natural" foods (this in itself is hugely problematic as what most of them think are natural aren't). The amount of farmland required will have to expand massively and at a time when it is actually shrinking.
So to save the planet, we will actually have to chop down more trees to make space for more farmland.
The only way to really save the planet is to adopt a Logan's Run rule about age, and impose harsh controls on procreation.
Nah it's to start serious investment into space habitat creation. You could have billions living in rotating habitats with space agriculture via mirrors and shade and robotic farming on inhospitable but farmable planets alongside robotic heavy industry. All doable by the early 2100s if we start investment now. And it gets us off planet in case the big one hits.
From last thread: Reply to Casino Royale on veganism:
It is not often I am in agreement with you CR, but I am on this. Veganism is the equivalent of evangelical fundamentalist religion. It's advocates give the impression of believing themselves to be morally superior to the rest of the human race, and some are highly militant, objectionable and sometimes violent.
It is also highly questionable as to whether veganism is "sustainable" from an environmental perspective. A wholesale move to the production of vegan produce would have to destroy many ecosystems that depend on grazing, and would make genuine organic production largely unviable. It would also almost certainly lead to mass starvation if it were possible to immediately implement. Veganism is a fad for self righteous eccentrics.
The question I've never heard a vegetarian/vegan answer is what they expect to happen to all the animals we farm if overnight people stopped eating meat?
Do they expect farmers to relinquish their fields and let sheep and cows spend the rest of their days naturally grazing until they die of old age? Or would there be a mass slaughter of all the sheep and cows as the farmers look to change their fields over to whatever the vegan/vegetarian populace want to eat?
I expect it is the latter and I don't see how that would be any better. So I'm going to continue eating meat - to avoid a mass slaughter of animals.
There is an interesting section in Steven Pinker's latest book about this. Basically if we follow the eco-facists demands, massive reduction in meat, no GM, going back to "natural" foods (this in itself is hugely problematic as what most of them think are natural aren't). The amount of farmland required will have to expand massively and at a time when it is actually shrinking.
So to save the planet, we will actually have to chop down more trees to make space for more farmland.
The only way to really save the planet is to adopt a Logan's Run rule about age, and impose harsh controls on procreation.
Nah it's to start serious investment into space habitat creation. You could have billions living in rotating habitats with space agriculture via mirrors and shade and robotic farming on inhospitable but farmable planets alongside robotic heavy industry. All doable by the early 2100s if we start investment now. And it gets us off planet in case the big one hits.
From last thread: Reply to Casino Royale on veganism:
It is not often I am in agreement with you CR, but I am on this. Veganism is the equivalent of evangelical fundamentalist religion. It's advocates give the impression of believing themselves to be morally superior to the rest of the human race, and some are highly militant, objectionable and sometimes violent.
It is also highly questionable as to whether veganism is "sustainable" from an environmental perspective. A wholesale move to the production of vegan produce would have to destroy many ecosystems that depend on grazing, and would make genuine organic production largely unviable. It would also almost certainly lead to mass starvation if it were possible to immediately implement. Veganism is a fad for self righteous eccentrics.
The question I've never heard a vegetarian/vegan answer is what they expect to happen to all the animals we farm if overnight people stopped eating meat?
Do they expect farmers to relinquish their fields and let sheep and cows spend the rest of their days naturally grazing until they die of old age? Or would there be a mass slaughter of all the sheep and cows as the farmers look to change their fields over to whatever the vegan/vegetarian populace want to eat?
I expect it is the latter and I don't see how that would be any better. So I'm going to continue eating meat - to avoid a mass slaughter of animals.
There is an interesting section in Steven Pinker's latest book about this. Basically if we follow the eco-facists demands, massive reduction in meat, no GM, going back to "natural" foods (this in itself is hugely problematic as what most of them think are natural aren't). The amount of farmland required will have to expand massively and at a time when it is actually shrinking.
So to save the planet, we will actually have to chop down more trees to make space for more farmland.
The only way to really save the planet is to adopt a Logan's Run rule about age, and impose harsh controls on procreation.
Nah it's to start serious investment into space habitat creation. You could have billions living in rotating habitats with space agriculture via mirrors and shade and robotic farming on inhospitable but farmable planets alongside robotic heavy industry. All doable by the early 2100s if we start investment now. And it gets us off planet in case the big one hits.
That would be awesome, but not going to happen with politics running on a 4-5 year cycle. I'm happy to volunteer for the position of Global Emperor for Life (Benevolent), if it helps, though.
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
Indeed even the Flintstones Theme Tune is wrecked by that too.
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
Not to mention "the child who is born on the Sabbath day".
Given the figures in this paper on efficiency (yes, one paper from quick google, I'm sure other papers will have different figures) you'd need an awful lot of current pasture land not suitable for anything else: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/10/105002
To be clear though, I'm not advocating total veganism. I'm not a vegan, I eat meat (although not a great deal, probably twice per week on average, although it varies).
I think us meat eaters should be grateful to the vegetarians and vegans out there for increasing our share (by decreasing theirs) of the global sustainable budget for meat production ;-)
I read somewhere - and it has a ring of truth about it - that a non trivial cause of global warming is the methane produced by the farting and burping of cows. There are 1.5 billion of them in the world and each one farts and burps dozens of times a day. That's a lot of gas. OK, so the same applies to people and there are 7.7 billion of them. However, the fart or burp of a cow is several times richer in methane than that of a human.
But the thing about humans of course is that at the start of the industrial age, there were, what, only 1 or 2 billions around?
From last thread: Reply to Casino Royale on veganism:
It is not often I am in agreement with you CR, but I am on this. Veganism is the equivalent of evangelical fundamentalist religion. It's advocates give the impression of believing themselves to be morally superior to the rest of the human race, and some are highly militant, objectionable and sometimes violent.
It is also highly questionable as to whether veganism is "sustainable" from an environmental perspective. A wholesale move to the production of vegan produce would have to destroy many ecosystems that depend on grazing, and would make genuine organic prent. Veganism is a fad for self righteous eccentrics.
The question I've never heard a vegetarian/vegan answer is what they expect to happen to all the animals we farm if overnight people stopped eating meat?
Do they expect farmers to relinquish their fields and let sheep and cows spend the rest of their days naturally grazing until they die of old age? Or would there be a mass slaughter of all the sheep and cows as the farmers look to change their fields over to whatever the vegan/vegetarian populace want to eat?
I expect it is the latter and I don't see how that would be any better. So I'm going to continue eating meat - to avoid a mass slaughter of animals.
There is an interesting section in Steven Pinker's latest book about this. Basically if we follow the eco-facists demands, massive reduction in meat, no GM, going back to "natural" foods (this in itself is hugely problematic as what most of them think are natural aren't). The amount of farmland required will have to expand massively and at a time when it is actually shrinking.
So to save the planet, we will actually have to chop down more trees to make space for more farmland.
The only way to really save the planet is to adopt a Logan's Run rule about age, and impose harsh controls on procreation.
Nah it's to start serious investment into space habitat creation. You could have billions living in rotating habitats with space agriculture via mirrors and shade and robotic farming on inhospitable but farmable planets alongside robotic heavy industry. All doable by the early 2100s if we start investment now. And it gets us off planet in case the big one hits.
Isaac Arthur does a great series of videos on YouTube all about the practicalities from simple space stations right up to Dyson spheres and the like. First step will be unsurpressing the technologies that terrify the oil and gas companies
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
Indeed even the Flintstones Theme Tune is wrecked by that too.
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
"Oh yes, I'm the Great Pretender Just laughing and GAY like a clown"
To be fair I'm pretty sure he knew both meanings of the word then . . .
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
Not to mention "the child who is born on the Sabbath day".
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
"Oh yes, I'm the Great Pretender Just laughing and GAY like a clown"
To be fair I'm pretty sure he knew both meanings of the word then . . .
Three of my friends/colleagues are vegan. I doubt anyone who does not know them quite wel knows they are vegan (other than a few restuarant staff who may have been asked questions about ingredients). Outside of people you know, you're unlikely to know that 'quiet' vegans are vegan. None of the three has ever lectured me or tried to change my ways.
Some vegans are aresholes. Some meat eaters are aresholes. People are just people and labelling a whole group in one way is rarely useful or fair.
On sustainability, its more efficient to grow crops than grow crops and feed them to animals before eating the animals. That doesn't mean a wholesale and rapid change would be a good idea and it would undoubtedly harm (or at least change, hamr can be subjective) some habitats and harm some other plants/species. Stopping meat production and growing more crops would likely be bad for global grass populations ;-)
Given
Given the figures in this paper on efficiency (yes, one paper from quick google, I'm sure other papers will have different figures) you'd need an awful lot of current pasture land not suitable for anything else: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/10/105002
To be clear though, I'm not advocating total veganism. I'm not a vegan, I eat meat (although not a great deal, probably twice per week on average, although it varies).
I think us meat eaters should be grateful to the vegetarians and vegans out there for increasing our share (by decreasing theirs) of the global sustainable budget for meat production ;-)
I have nothing against Vegans. But anyone who has lived in Africa or the Middle East knows that there are huge areas of pasture or grazing lands on this planet not suitable for anything else. Most of the Arabian peninsula, Mongolia and the Central Asian steppe, and large swaths of Africa, Australia, not to mention mountain sides.
The Dust Bowl in the US was created when European settlers tried to turn pasture into arable land.
Animal grazing lands are not fungible with arable lands for the most part.
Excellent post.
And, if those protein sources were denied, you’d end up needing to clear extra rainforest for growing soybeans, or similar.
You can get more energy per unit of land from arable farming compared to grazing for livestock, and then consuming that in turn. But that doesn’t factor in the types of land, its availability, its fungibility, the environmental opportunity cost or the diversity of the human diet.
As always, complex problems don’t have simple answers.
Unfortunately most also do not remember the original non-sexual orientation usage of the word either. Which is a kind of a shame as it is a good word and it would be nice if both meanings of the word remained in use side by side.
Yes, it's a great shame because there really isn't another English word which exactly captures the original meaning of 'gay'.
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
"Oh yes, I'm the Great Pretender Just laughing and GAY like a clown"
To be fair I'm pretty sure he knew both meanings of the word then . . .
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
And Naomi Wolf! Why should I give a toss what millionaire New York liberal Naomi Wolf thinks about a general election in the UK? Especially when she won’t be paying any of Corbyn’s new communist taxes.
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
And Naomi Wolf! Why should I give a toss what millionaire New York liberal Naomi Wolf thinks about a general election in the UK? Especially when she won’t be paying any of Corbyn’s new communist taxes.
PUKE
I am not going to bother going through and looking them all up, but a good proportion of them are in a similar boat.
He isn't happy but it's no worse than the promises the Tories are making.
I suspect whoever wins this election is in for a world of pain when reality hits.
They're not promises, they are pure lies. Labour have ignored inflation, which in the case of leccy/gas/water shows that people are paying, on average, less than they were in 2010.
I think they got Diane to do it, and then Burgon 'corrected' her calculations.
He isn't happy but it's no worse than the promises the Tories are making.
I suspect whoever wins this election is in for a world of pain when reality hits.
It smacks of desperation tho. The spurious exactitude of “£6700”. Spare us
Labour are like a thwarted suitor making ever more ridiculous promises in the hope of a bunk-up. At a certain stage it becomes embarrassing for all, and actively repellent
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
And Naomi Wolf! Why should I give a toss what millionaire New York liberal Naomi Wolf thinks about a general election in the UK? Especially when she won’t be paying any of Corbyn’s new communist taxes.
PUKE
I am not going to bother going through and looking them all up, but a good proportion of them are in a similar boat.
Like you said, the real striking thing about that list is how short it is, and who’s not on it.
No Stephen Fry. Hugh Laurie. Emma Thompson. Tony Robinson.
He isn't happy but it's no worse than the promises the Tories are making.
I suspect whoever wins this election is in for a world of pain when reality hits.
It's about £80 billion worse.
@eek has been on quite a journey since he voted to leave the EU in 2016.
Having met Boris and knowing others who have worked with him - shall we just say that my vote was definitely the least worst candidate who can win the seat.
Now the Labour manifesto is utterly insane even if we exclude all the announcements that aren't actually in it but as Corbyn cannot win a majority I'm hoping that others could control the more insane parts.
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
And Naomi Wolf! Why should I give a toss what millionaire New York liberal Naomi Wolf thinks about a general election in the UK? Especially when she won’t be paying any of Corbyn’s new communist taxes.
PUKE
I am not going to bother going through and looking them all up, but a good proportion of them are in a similar boat.
Like you said, the real striking thing about that list is how short it is, and who’s not on it.
No Stephen Fry. Hugh Laurie. Emma Thompson. Tony Robinson.
Etc. Etc.
Ahhh. Now they're proper luvvies, they are. And I suspect they don't deny the Holocaust in the say way as Ken Loach.
Edit: And for that matter Chomsky has a similar list of "accidental associations" to Corbyn.
As a secular Jew, I think it outrageous my brethren get an opt out on cruelty laws. Either its cruel or its not, but you can't have one rule for Peter and one for Paul.
Silly sloganeering. If you have finite assets, to allocate more to those with less you necessarily have to take from those with more. There's local pockets across which that is not necessarily true, and special rules might temporarily apply to pretendy assets like money, but overall it cannot not be the case.
They seem to manage a more balanced society in the Nordic countries. Their rich people appear to be happy being just wealthy rather than wanting to have it all and have everybody else poor. The UK is a sh**hole.
I have some experience of Scandinavia. It is rather more nuanced than that. There is a much stronger racist anti-foreigner sentiment there, for instance. I'm always struck by the obsession with migrants in the various Scandi-noir series.
I’d like to see some objective academic studies before I started to believe that Scandinavians have “much stronger racist anti-foreigner sentiment” than, for example, English people. My experience, as a Scandinavian, is quite the opposite. We are very kind and tolerant towards non-Scandinavians...
@Burgessian is perhaps thinking of the Swedish Democrats ?
The difference is that the Scandinavians, due to PR voting systems, have separate parties, whereas England has “wings” within parties. Eg. in Sweden there are: - two LibDem parties (urban and rural) - three Labour parties (centre-left, left and feminist) - two Green parties (left and centrist) - three conservative parties (social conservatives, economic liberals and anti-migration)
So, while the Danish People’s Party and the Sweden Democrats are highly visible, they are matched, indeed exceeded, by anti-migration sentiment deeply imbedded in the Tory party in England, due to FPTP.
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
And Naomi Wolf! Why should I give a toss what millionaire New York liberal Naomi Wolf thinks about a general election in the UK? Especially when she won’t be paying any of Corbyn’s new communist taxes.
PUKE
I am not going to bother going through and looking them all up, but a good proportion of them are in a similar boat.
Like you said, the real striking thing about that list is how short it is, and who’s not on it.
No Stephen Fry. Hugh Laurie. Emma Thompson. Tony Robinson.
Etc. Etc.
Ahhh. Now they're proper luvvies, they are. And I suspect they don't deny the Holocaust in the say way as Ken Loach.
Ken Loach appeared in that recent NHS Documentary shown in some cinemas.
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
And Naomi Wolf! Why should I give a toss what millionaire New York liberal Naomi Wolf thinks about a general election in the UK? Especially when she won’t be paying any of Corbyn’s new communist taxes.
PUKE
I am not going to bother going through and looking them all up, but a good proportion of them are in a similar boat.
Like you said, the real striking thing about that list is how short it is, and who’s not on it.
No Stephen Fry. Hugh Laurie. Emma Thompson. Tony Robinson.
Etc. Etc.
Ahhh. Now they're proper luvvies, they are. And I suspect they don't deny the Holocaust in the say way as Ken Loach.
Also Stephen Fry isn't very keen on the insectual woke stuff that is very much part of a load of the left these days.
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
And Naomi Wolf! Why should I give a toss what millionaire New York liberal Naomi Wolf thinks about a general election in the UK? Especially when she won’t be paying any of Corbyn’s new communist taxes.
PUKE
I am not going to bother going through and looking them all up, but a good proportion of them are in a similar boat.
Like you said, the real striking thing about that list is how short it is, and who’s not on it.
No Stephen Fry. Hugh Laurie. Emma Thompson. Tony Robinson.
Etc. Etc.
The only one on that thin list that surprises and disappoints me is film director Aki Kaurismaki.
As a secular Jew, I think it outrageous my brethren get an opt out on cruelty laws. Either its cruel or its not, but you can't have one rule for Peter and one for Paul.
Absolutely. I don’t care if it’s your religion. Lots of religions have mad medieval bits that we don’t tolerate, from widow -burning to gay-murdering. Why is animal cruelty permitted?
And no one is stopping Jews and Muslims from praying over the animals and whatnot. You just have to stun the poor creatures first, to minimise the suffering.
Leave won because Remain offered no hope for the future. The Tory manifesto is the same:-
it can't talk about transport because of HS2 and Heathrow (both required but seriously badly missold from the first announcement). it can't talk about improving the North because it will upset the south. It can't talk about other things because that would mean admitting austerity was the disaster it was.
So instead it focuses on badly thought out Police and other issues.
And the one thing the tories are doing is throwing money at target seats witness my comment last week regarding the roads they want in Darlington.
Nish Kumar is such a piss poor comedian he doesn't even have a good anti-heckle riposte. It is the first thing any stand-up worth their salt is develop a good set of anti-heckle put downs.
The Tories have got Adam Ricketts and that Ken Barlow bloke so labour can kiss my rump
Don't forget Gary Barlow :-)
How could I?! I was thinking about Hugh Grant canvassing for everyone. Do you reckon he was just passing time whilst scouting for another prozzie to nosh him off like that Divine woman?
I have found a clip of what Nish Kumar "comedy" routine that caused him to get boo'ed and go full Bercow....
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uOMCb0JYkI
The problem was he wasn't telling jokes, just attacking the audience for being what he presumably regarded as gammons.
And just kept on with the same act, after it became quite clear he'd lost the audience completely. Good comedians realise they're going down the wrong path and switch to other material, don't just double down on what those paying the bill don't like.
This must be the Nato Conference of selective amnesia when past clips appear of Donald Trump saying that 'everything is on the table including the NHS' followed by his comment yesterday that he has never mentioned the NHS ?
Furthermore quotes appear in a major newspaper this morning which illustrate Johnson's past feelings about Trump when he stated that Trump ' has a quite stupefying ignorance that makes him, frankly unfit to hold the office of president of the United states.' I wonder if Trump has seen that one yet?
Nish Kumar is such a piss poor comedian he doesn't even have a good anti-heckle riposte. It is the first thing any stand-up worth their salt is develop a good set of anti-heckle put downs.
See Bill Hicks, Jimmy Carr, Frankie Boyle, Anthony Jeselnik... All utterly brutal with anyone who interrupted them.
I have found a clip of what Nish Kumar "comedy" routine that caused him to get boo'ed and go full Bercow....
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uOMCb0JYkI
The problem was he wasn't telling jokes, just attacking the audience for being what he presumably regarded as gammons.
And just kept on with the same act, after it became quite clear he'd lost the audience completely. Good comedians realise they're going down the wrong path and switch to other material, don't just double down on what those paying the bill don't like.
Absolutely. I saw a stand-up a couple of months ago and it was clear he came with a load of anti-Brexit material, he did a couple of gags and you could tell the audience was oh god not f##king Brexit....and he openly said, ok, so you guys wouldn't be interested in other 30 mins of this, pretended to rip up a script and then told a very full story about going to antenatal classes.
Nish Kumar is such a piss poor comedian he doesn't even have a good anti-heckle riposte. It is the first thing any stand-up worth their salt is develop a good set of anti-heckle put downs.
Decades ago, a chap at work went to see Jim Davidson, then at his prime-time peak, live, and came back gushing about how he'd put down this heckler.
He was so impressed he went again. Same heckler. Same put-down. Same point in show.
Even with proper comics, it depends on the heckler being isolated and compos mentis. If you get a group of drunks who join in the show, that's it.
But the thing about humans of course is that at the start of the industrial age, there were, what, only 1 or 2 billions around?
Yes. I suppose the cow population has grown approx pro rata with the human one. The more of us there are, the more of them we need. Current ratio 5 people to 1 cow. Sounds odd when you put it that way. Surely 1 cow should be enough for many more than just 5 people. Instinctively I would have said more like 50.
This must be the Nato Conference of selective amnesia when past clips appear of Donald Trump saying that 'everything is on the table including the NHS' followed by his comment yesterday that he has never mentioned the NHS ?
Furthermore quotes appear in a major newspaper this morning which illustrate Johnson's past feelings about Trump when he stated that Trump ' has a quite stupefying ignorance that makes him, frankly unfit to hold the office of president of the United states.' I wonder if Trump has seen that one yet?
In that first conference Trump had absolutely not idea what the NHS was. You might as well ask a British politician about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Terms that anyone in american politics could talk about for hours but utterly unknown to anyone outside of the USA.
Nish Kumar is such a piss poor comedian he doesn't even have a good anti-heckle riposte. It is the first thing any stand-up worth their salt is develop a good set of anti-heckle put downs.
See Bill Hicks, Jimmy Carr, Frankie Boyle...
I don't know much about Nish Kumar, but I wonder these days how many that get picked up for tv have done the hard yards across the clubs?
Even though working men's clubs died out, what you did get is the rise of Jongleurs. And basically anybody who became anybody on panel shows / tv, had done those clubs up and down the country for years...and I have been to a load of those and you better be bloody good, especially the late show on a Friday or Saturday night with the drunks, as the heckling could be really intense.
But the thing about humans of course is that at the start of the industrial age, there were, what, only 1 or 2 billions around?
Yes. I suppose the cow population has grown approx pro rata with the human one. The more of us there are, the more of them we need. Current ratio 5 people to 1 cow. Sounds odd when you put it that way. Surely 1 cow should be enough for many more than just 5 people. Instinctively I would have said more like 50.
Over what time frame? 5 people, one cow, one year sounds about right. Although for everyone like me who'd happily eat a kilo of steak a day, there will be a few who don't eat any, or just an occasional small portion.
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
And Naomi Wolf! Why should I give a toss what millionaire New York liberal Naomi Wolf thinks about a general election in the UK? Especially when she won’t be paying any of Corbyn’s new communist taxes.
PUKE
I am not going to bother going through and looking them all up, but a good proportion of them are in a similar boat.
Makes perfect sense that Alexei Sayle is on the list - lifelong Marxist.... also reported as saying
"In May 2018, regarding the expulsion of Marc Wadsworth from the Labour Party, Sayle commented: "The Party should walk over broken glass to beg people of Marc's calibre to work with them - they are very few and Marc is one of the best. There is a battle going on to destroy and reverse the unexpected and amazing gains the left has made in the last three years. Marc is a casualty in that battle and I am joining the fight to see him re-instated to the front line."
I have found a clip of what Nish Kumar "comedy" routine that caused him to get boo'ed and go full Bercow....
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uOMCb0JYkI
The problem was he wasn't telling jokes, just attacking the audience for being what he presumably regarded as gammons.
And just kept on with the same act, after it became quite clear he'd lost the audience completely. Good comedians realise they're going down the wrong path and switch to other material, don't just double down on what those paying the bill don't like.
Absolutely. I saw a stand-up a couple of months ago and it was clear he came with a load of anti-Brexit material, he did a couple of gags and you could tell the audience was oh god not f##king Brexit....and he openly said, ok, so you guys wouldn't be interested in other 30 mins of this, pretended to rip up a script and then told a very full story about going to antenatal classes.
My wife dragged me to a Sara Pascoe show, most of it entertaining, and then the identity politics started. As white people we are all responsible for whatever drivel was in the news, and brexit was an act of white supremacy. I *should* have got up and walked out, but my wife would have been embarrassed.
Just because shes had a lot of fortune in her life, which had a damn good start, and might feel guilty that, dont assume that everyone else has had such a head start.
I have found a clip of what Nish Kumar "comedy" routine that caused him to get boo'ed and go full Bercow....
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uOMCb0JYkI
The problem was he wasn't telling jokes, just attacking the audience for being what he presumably regarded as gammons.
And just kept on with the same act, after it became quite clear he'd lost the audience completely. Good comedians realise they're going down the wrong path and switch to other material, don't just double down on what those paying the bill don't like.
Absolutely. I saw a stand-up a couple of months ago and it was clear he came with a load of anti-Brexit material, he did a couple of gags and you could tell the audience was oh god not f##king Brexit....and he openly said, ok, so you guys wouldn't be interested in other 30 mins of this, pretended to rip up a script and then told a very full story about going to antenatal classes.
My wife dragged me to a Sara Pascoe show, most of it entertaining, and then the identity politics started. As white people we are all responsible for whatever drivel was in the news, and brexit was an act of white supremacy. I *should* have got up and walked out, but my wife would have been embarrassed.
Just because shes had a lot of fortune in her life, which had a damn good start, and might feel guilty that, dont assume that everyone else has had such a head start.
Sara Pascoe is vegan iirc so the thread comes full circle-ish. Whoever writes her Wikipedia page needs to look at a map btw.
Comments
And of course the loss of the original meaning wrecks one of Yeats' finest poems.
Buy British. I think there's a strong argument to being pescatarian in say Brazil.
Yes, it’s a business and a livelihood but they also have compassion for their animals too.
Just laughing and GAY like a clown"
Jeff Bezos gave a great talk on this, RIP Gerard O'Neill
It’s outrageous. In a few years we will wonder how this was ever tolerated.
https://www.rspca.org.uk/getinvolved/campaign/slaughter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pzkszgjkj6Q
And, if those protein sources were denied, you’d end up needing to clear extra rainforest for growing soybeans, or similar.
You can get more energy per unit of land from arable farming compared to grazing for livestock, and then consuming that in turn. But that doesn’t factor in the types of land, its availability, its fungibility, the environmental opportunity cost or the diversity of the human diet.
As always, complex problems don’t have simple answers.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/03/vote-for-hope-and-a-decent-future
Seems a poor list when you can only get 40 and some of which aren't even able to vote in the GE e.g Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis
It appears first and foremost they just ignored inflation e.g. https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1202187184746442755
I suspect whoever wins this election is in for a world of pain when reality hits.
PUKE
I think they got Diane to do it, and then Burgon 'corrected' her calculations.
I should give myself a medal.
Labour are like a thwarted suitor making ever more ridiculous promises in the hope of a bunk-up. At a certain stage it becomes embarrassing for all, and actively repellent
Sounds the identikit Jezza / XR supporter these days.
No Stephen Fry. Hugh Laurie. Emma Thompson. Tony Robinson.
Etc. Etc.
There is nothing in their (the Tories) manifesto.
Errm I did some logic at University, can you run those two statements through for me.
Now the Labour manifesto is utterly insane even if we exclude all the announcements that aren't actually in it but as Corbyn cannot win a majority I'm hoping that others could control the more insane parts.
Edit: And for that matter Chomsky has a similar list of "accidental associations" to Corbyn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uOMCb0JYkI
And no one is stopping Jews and Muslims from praying over the animals and whatnot. You just have to stun the poor creatures first, to minimise the suffering.
Leave won because Remain offered no hope for the future. The Tory manifesto is the same:-
it can't talk about transport because of HS2 and Heathrow (both required but seriously badly missold from the first announcement).
it can't talk about improving the North because it will upset the south.
It can't talk about other things because that would mean admitting austerity was the disaster it was.
So instead it focuses on badly thought out Police and other issues.
And the one thing the tories are doing is throwing money at target seats witness my comment last week regarding the roads they want in Darlington.
Also, I love octopus, but won't eat it because they are just too amazing. Go figure.
It’s overrated anyway.
I was thinking about Hugh Grant canvassing for everyone. Do you reckon he was just passing time whilst scouting for another prozzie to nosh him off like that Divine woman?
Furthermore quotes appear in a major newspaper this morning which illustrate Johnson's past feelings about Trump when he stated that Trump ' has a quite stupefying ignorance that makes him, frankly unfit to hold the office of president of the United states.' I wonder if Trump has seen that one yet?
All utterly brutal with anyone who interrupted them.
The replies to this...…………..
He was so impressed he went again. Same heckler. Same put-down. Same point in show.
Even with proper comics, it depends on the heckler being isolated and compos mentis. If you get a group of drunks who join in the show, that's it.
Even though working men's clubs died out, what you did get is the rise of Jongleurs. And basically anybody who became anybody on panel shows / tv, had done those clubs up and down the country for years...and I have been to a load of those and you better be bloody good, especially the late show on a Friday or Saturday night with the drunks, as the heckling could be really intense.
5 people, one cow, one year sounds about right.
Although for everyone like me who'd happily eat a kilo of steak a day, there will be a few who don't eat any, or just an occasional small portion.
https://twitter.com/YourePerfidy/status/1202176486637211648
"In May 2018, regarding the expulsion of Marc Wadsworth from the Labour Party, Sayle commented: "The Party should walk over broken glass to beg people of Marc's calibre to work with them - they are very few and Marc is one of the best. There is a battle going on to destroy and reverse the unexpected and amazing gains the left has made in the last three years. Marc is a casualty in that battle and I am joining the fight to see him re-instated to the front line."
What a waste of a week leafleting and doorknocking that was.
Just because shes had a lot of fortune in her life, which had a damn good start, and might feel guilty that, dont assume that everyone else has had such a head start.
Their campaign is falling apart.