1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
The difference is rooted in American culture, an ingrained distrust of authority and government supported by the constitutional right to bear arms - in order to keep reminding those in charge that they are the servants of the nation, rather than the masters of it.
It's a very difficult place to police, when in almost every situation it has to be assumed that everyone is armed. How this gets de-escalated is the $64,000 question, but arming the police like they're the army definitely isn't the way to start.
Can we just disabuse ourselves please of one misconception regarding the widely misquoted 2nd Amendment.
It does indeed confer the right of citizens to bear arms but it does not restrict the State's right to stipulate what sort of arms and how and when they may be used. This is why you will be pulled up short should you try to park an Abrams tank on your front lawn or build a small thermonuclear device in your garden shed.
The State could restrict gun ownership much further than it does already without even coming close to offending either the letter or the spirit of the 2nd Amendment. It could for example ban assault weapons. That it does not do so is down to various reasons, some of which you mention, but largely because the NRA has the politicians by the short and curlies.
The NRA used to be in favour of gun control when it was being used to target Black Panthers.
Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?
That was six years ago.
They voted to stay in the UK that was part of the EU. Johnson upended that ludo board into the fireplace and is a sufficiently fundamental change that another referendum is warranted if they ask for it.
How long is a "generation" anyway?
Can I refer Mr Dancer back to the basic point which is that it is not up to England what Scotland does in a Union of Equals. If events mean Scotland changes it's mind then fine. The Union in question only came into being at the 4th attempt. We had two re-elections before the end of the 2015 parliament because the party who won the 2015 election didn't like the result...
Yes. And we can safely assume that a second referendum in Scotland that resulted in a second No vote would result in the defeated side starting the campaign for a third vote the next day. And, because they have a solid grip on the Scottish Parliament, they'd get it before many more years had passed. And then, if necessary, a fourth, fifth and sixth. Rinse, repeat.
This is just one of the reasons why we should hope for and embrace the end of the Union. It would bring clarity, and resolve a lot of problems.
It's not inevitable that support for indy will remain so high. I think it will and the union will end, but that doesnt mean I think union supporters should give up because indy supporters will keep trying and probably win in the end.
They probably will, but they need to work for it.
And it's a bit strange to assume the clarification and resolution of problems which would occur would not also potentially create a bunch of issues as well. Many people believe on balance it would be worth it and fair enough, embracing the end doesnt end problems.
Outstanding piece, Casino, and thank you for putting the case so well. The best bit?
'I’m worried some of their actions might move us away from building a society that is colour blind to one that is colour obsessed, and frustrate understanding rather than building it.'
It's difficult but not impossible and it has to be done. Laws can help, but they will only take you so far. BLM can be a pain in the arse sometimes, especially when it allows itself to be hijacked by groups who wouldn't be given the time of day if they appeared under their own banner. But we can't shrug and give up just because of them.
BLM has been a force for good because it's made so many of us realise that some sort of formal equality is not sufficient, it needs a society wide change of attitude to eliminate the kind of casual everyday racism that we barely notice, unless we're on the receiving end. When we get rid of that, we'll be neither color blind nor color obsessed.
I won't be alive when it happens, but I'll be doing what I can in the meantime.
Living in the US, the thing that really stood out to me was that a group of white people with assault rifles were able to occupy the State Senate building. While a black man, just two days later, who was suspected (incorrectly) of carrying a weapon was gunned down by police a few hundred yards from the same building.
I think it's reasonable to assume that a "black militia" would not have been allowed to occupy the State Senate. And a white man suspected of carrying a firearm would probably not have been shot on the street.
But these are US problem, not UK ones. The UK has issues, but they are far less serious than US ones. We would do well to remember that.
Agreed, Robert, at the risk of labouring the point, one big difference is the availability of firearms.
Sure but Canada has a huge quantity of fire arms per person and no mass epidemic of police shootings. Ditto Finland and Switzerland, Iceland etc.
So its cultural. Thats harder to fix, so lowering the gun amounts would be a start.
Brexit did not cause, but did reveal, the existence of two tribes in the UK with very different views about our history and identity. Reactions to BLM protests reveal pretty much the same fault line.
Yes, and it's startingly similar to the main political divide (the "salient cleavage", as a politics professor of mine used to call it) in the United States since the civil rights movement/Vietnam War/Roe v Wade: stereotypically the patriotic/bigoted white lower class on one extreme and the Marxist/caring educated elites on the other, with the rest in the middle somewhere.
It's where identity politics gets you.
Is it possible to have a multi-racial society without identity politics? I would like to believe it is, but I'm not sure. None spring to mind.
Identity politics was not created by a multi ethnic society. We had it before, in other forms such as class identity, Church vs Chapel, landed vs landless. All politics is about our relations with others, and the organisation of those relations, so conceptions of identity are a core part of politics.
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
Yeah, except ..... most of the private houses with guns have no ammunition.
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
At the time the Scottish were told that enduring poena cullei English was the only way for them to remain in the EU. JY Le Drian (French Foreign Minister) has recently said that an independent Scotland would have 'sa propre place' in the EU. There is no doubt they would have the quickest accession ever, if only to spite the English and to a lesser degree the Welsh.
Dominic Raab's enraged incomprehension at the start of the year as EU members have lined up to say Scotland would have an easy ascension was an absolute highlight.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
Very well written piece, Casino. I also happen to agree with it.
As an aside I have zero interest in Culture Wars. I kind of wish culture warriors actively participating on PB would lay off. It's an unfortunate part of our politics, so can we discuss it as a phenomenon - how it affects Trump's re-election etc - rather than fight it out on these pages?
Until we do some serious constitutional reform these issues are only going to get worse. People who are unequal feel they are being treated unequally shock. How many groups does this apply to? A significant number of Scots. Half of NI. Yorkshire. Cornwall. Brexit voters. BAME people. We aren't the only state (not nation) who is multi-national, yet we seem to think that an unwritten made up as we go along fudge will do.
If we want to save the Union a Federal UK with written legal framework is the minimum requirement. That may not be enough to prevent nations departing, so do we create a Commonwealth which provides looser arrangements to accommodate Scotland and NI and perhaps gives some status to the absurdity of the Crown Dependencies.
Brexit did not cause, but did reveal, the existence of two tribes in the UK with very different views about our history and identity. Reactions to BLM protests reveal pretty much the same fault line.
Yes, and it's startingly similar to the main political divide (the "salient cleavage", as a politics professor of mine used to call it) in the United States since the civil rights movement/Vietnam War/Roe v Wade: stereotypically the patriotic/bigoted white lower class on one extreme and the Marxist/caring educated elites on the other, with the rest in the middle somewhere.
It's where identity politics gets you.
Is it possible to have a multi-racial society without identity politics? I would like to believe it is, but I'm not sure. None spring to mind.
Identity politics was not created by a multi ethnic society. We had it before, in other forms such as class identity, Church vs Chapel, landed vs landless. All politics is about our relations with others, and the organisation of those relations, so conceptions of identity are a core part of politics.
As I am fond of saying "all politics is identity politics". Its just many people like to think of 'their' identity as 'normal'. It is 'others' who have those divisive 'identities' that cause trouble.
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
At the time the Scottish were told that enduring poena cullei English was the only way for them to remain in the EU. JY Le Drian (French Foreign Minister) has recently said that an independent Scotland would have 'sa propre place' in the EU. There is no doubt they would have the quickest accession ever, if only to spite the English and to a lesser degree the Welsh.
Dominic Raab's enraged incomprehension at the start of the year as EU members have lined up to say Scotland would have an easy ascension was an absolute highlight.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
It would work for me if Scotland & N Ireland went back to EU membership and left England in its Littler Britain.
[Good header CR - I have always thought if you create separate identities /tribes/cultures especially based on biological facts like race then you create conflict (if not immediate then in the future). Best to focus on being colour blind not colour obsessed as you say. I thought this was my liberal thinking as it was not the case in my growing up (where races were more separate and tribal ) but then astonished to realise I am classed as a reactionary when listening to a black professor at a conference back in January 2020 saying that race identity is paramount and being colour blind is bad . I wonder if academics have pushed the narrative in the last few years to justify grants etc in this area and made things the way they are now (ie being colour blind is bad) (definitely worse than 5 years ago)- Of course once you are out of step with current race thinking then you are a racist or at least "part of the problem"
Came as a shock to me when speaking with some family - who gleefully advertise their woke credentials - that not recognising colour when you met someone new is morally wrong and, therefore, so is liberaliism. There you go.
The opposite of colour obsessed isn’t (as Casino also suggests) colour blind, though. I too recoil from the idea that “race identity is paramount”, but you can’t deny the importance of cultural identity, and that, like the colour of you skin, is bound up with where you came from.
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
Yeah, except ..... most of the private houses with guns have no ammunition.
You get 50 rounds to put in your sock drawer if you're an army reservist. So basically 2 mags for your SG550.
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
At the time the Scottish were told that enduring poena cullei English was the only way for them to remain in the EU. JY Le Drian (French Foreign Minister) has recently said that an independent Scotland would have 'sa propre place' in the EU. There is no doubt they would have the quickest accession ever, if only to spite the English and to a lesser degree the Welsh.
Dominic Raab's enraged incomprehension at the start of the year as EU members have lined up to say Scotland would have an easy ascension was an absolute highlight.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
It would work for me if Scotland & N Ireland went back to EU membership and left England in its Littler Britain.
Be careful not to slip while typing that penultimate word.
Very well written piece, Casino. I also happen to agree with it.
As an aside I have zero interest in Culture Wars. I kind of wish culture warriors actively participating on PB would lay off. It's an unfortunate part of our politics, so can we discuss it as a phenomenon - how it affects Trump's re-election etc - rather than fight it out on these pages?
Would make a notable improvement to PB. Actually, I don’t there there are that many PB Culture Warriors, it’s simply that the few there are completely dominate the threads.
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
But Mr Dancer events have unfortunately changed the dynamic since 2014, notably Scotland voting to remain in the EU in 2016, and Dominic Cummings' subsequent interpretation of what Brexit means for the UK, and in particular for Scotland.
Actions have reactions. Johnson's USP is that by wrapping himself in the flag of St. George he becomes more popular, but by doing that he unwraps a latent English nationalism. Amongst other things this makes many more Scots realise English nationalism does nothing for them.
Johnson is a great recruiting sergeant for neutral Scots to become more minded towards an independent Scotland.
On BLM it is good that more effort seems to being made on addressing homegrown issues. One of my main issues had been the attempt to be part of a trendy global movement without sufficient regard to the very different national contexts which would require very different responses and demands. Generic rage at genetic injustice globally is understandable but not useful, and is downright counterproductive when any progress is not acknowledged or all places judged as though the same. Turning protests thoughtful is an important step from following a trend and making it your own.
Brexit did not cause, but did reveal, the existence of two tribes in the UK with very different views about our history and identity. Reactions to BLM protests reveal pretty much the same fault line.
Yes, and it's startingly similar to the main political divide (the "salient cleavage", as a politics professor of mine used to call it) in the United States since the civil rights movement/Vietnam War/Roe v Wade: stereotypically the patriotic/bigoted white lower class on one extreme and the Marxist/caring educated elites on the other, with the rest in the middle somewhere.
It's where identity politics gets you.
Is it possible to have a multi-racial society without identity politics? I would like to believe it is, but I'm not sure. None spring to mind.
Identity politics was not created by a multi ethnic society. We had it before, in other forms such as class identity, Church vs Chapel, landed vs landless. All politics is about our relations with others, and the organisation of those relations, so conceptions of identity are a core part of politics.
As I am fond of saying "all politics is identity politics". Its just many people like to think of 'their' identity as 'normal'. It is 'others' who have those divisive 'identities' that cause trouble.
an interesting and sane piece in the Observer this morning:
"We need a lot more listening, understanding, dialogue and forgiveness." This is a good message. While the article is earnest, and this is a tricky topic to write about, I'm afraid I think the author needs to do more listening to those protesting.
I dont think the protests are saying, there's a small minority of racists who need to change. I don't think they are saying the UK is the most racist country in the world.
I do think they are saying there are systematic biases in our society we have to deal with. And that it's not enough to say I am not racist so I have nothing more to do. (And in some way we probably all are a bit racist unfortunately).
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
At the time the Scottish were told that enduring poena cullei English was the only way for them to remain in the EU. JY Le Drian (French Foreign Minister) has recently said that an independent Scotland would have 'sa propre place' in the EU. There is no doubt they would have the quickest accession ever, if only to spite the English and to a lesser degree the Welsh.
Dominic Raab's enraged incomprehension at the start of the year as EU members have lined up to say Scotland would have an easy ascension was an absolute highlight.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
Scotlands rejoining the EU would be fairly seamless at present as alignment is there. It may not be in 5 years if the scorched earth Brexiteers get their way over the next few years. That is an argument supportive of Sindyref3 sooner rather than later, of course.
Thst whole statehouse business was insane. Unless it was reported and I missed it I'm amazed (or rather not) that the whole lot are not already serving very long prison sentences.
Excellent header CR. One of the most important challenges in tackling racism is admitting it exists in the first place - compare the UK where 80%+ agree there is racism or intolerance in the country with Russia at barely 50% or Japan, less than 60%.
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
The difference is rooted in American culture, an ingrained distrust of authority and government supported by the constitutional right to bear arms - in order to keep reminding those in charge that they are the servants of the nation, rather than the masters of it.
It's a very difficult place to police, when in almost every situation it has to be assumed that everyone is armed. How this gets de-escalated is the $64,000 question, but arming the police like they're the army definitely isn't the way to start.
Can we just disabuse ourselves please of one misconception regarding the widely misquoted 2nd Amendment.
It does indeed confer the right of citizens to bear arms but it does not restrict the State's right to stipulate what sort of arms and how and when they may be used. This is why you will be pulled up short should you try to park an Abrams tank on your front lawn or build a small thermonuclear device in your garden shed.
The State could restrict gun ownership much further than it does already without even coming close to offending either the letter or the spirit of the 2nd Amendment. It could for example ban assault weapons. That it does not do so is down to various reasons, some of which you mention, but largely because the NRA has the politicians by the short and curlies.
The NRA used to be in favour of gun control when it was being used to target Black Panthers.
Until we do some serious constitutional reform these issues are only going to get worse. People who are unequal feel they are being treated unequally shock. How many groups does this apply to? A significant number of Scots. Half of NI. Yorkshire. Cornwall. Brexit voters. BAME people. We aren't the only state (not nation) who is multi-national, yet we seem to think that an unwritten made up as we go along fudge will do.
If we want to save the Union a Federal UK with written legal framework is the minimum requirement. That may not be enough to prevent nations departing, so do we create a Commonwealth which provides looser arrangements to accommodate Scotland and NI and perhaps gives some status to the absurdity of the Crown Dependencies.
There will never be a federal UK because the only way to make that work would be an English Parliament, and the party leaders in London will never have that because it doesn't suit them and their desire to wield untrammelled power. So to create a sustainable settlement the Union must be dissolved.
This would merely be a reflection of the new reality. The principle reason why the UK has lasted this long is the distribution of money from south-east to north-west. If the fiscal transfers were running into England rather than out of it then it wouldn't last another five seconds.
The Union is a zombie. The body is still alive and shambling around, but the soul has departed.
Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?
That was six years ago.
They voted to stay in the UK that was part of the EU. Johnson upended that ludo board into the fireplace and is a sufficiently fundamental change that another referendum is warranted if they ask for it.
How long is a "generation" anyway?
Can I refer Mr Dancer back to the basic point which is that it is not up to England what Scotland does in a Union of Equals. If events mean Scotland changes it's mind then fine. The Union in question only came into being at the 4th attempt. We had two re-elections before the end of the 2015 parliament because the party who won the 2015 election didn't like the result...
Yes. And we can safely assume that a second referendum in Scotland that resulted in a second No vote would result in the defeated side starting the campaign for a third vote the next day. And, because they have a solid grip on the Scottish Parliament, they'd get it before many more years had passed. And then, if necessary, a fourth, fifth and sixth. Rinse, repeat.
This is just one of the reasons why we should hope for and embrace the end of the Union. It would bring clarity, and resolve a lot of problems.
It's not inevitable that support for indy will remain so high. I think it will and the union will end, but that doesnt mean I think union supporters should give up because indy supporters will keep trying and probably win in the end.
They probably will, but they need to work for it.
And it's a bit strange to assume the clarification and resolution of problems which would occur would not also potentially create a bunch of issues as well. Many people believe on balance it would be worth it and fair enough, embracing the end doesnt end problems.
The SNP have been trying to achieve independence for my lifetime and over generations
Their quest was there long before we joined the EU, continued throughout our membership, and will not stop ad infinitum
I am very much in favour of allowing Scotland another referendum if the SNP win Holyrood next year on a manifesto promise to hold another referendum and would hope it would be agreed to be held by no later than mid 2022
However, the SNP are very much flavour of the month in Scotland but once the reality of the divorce becomes obvious, not least the economic covid damage and collapse of oil due to climate change, together with a hard border between Berwick and Carlisle complicating the 60% of Scots exports to England, the negatives will outweigh the positives by some distance
Add in the issues over the pound, the delay between exit and admission to EU membership it is likely to continue to be just a dream for many Scots
To be honest can anyone really see a hard Scots border with custom controls and currency exchanges for the euro to the pound and visa versa and also Scotland's geographic position and distance from Europe.
Berman folds, perhaps because his replacement is now his (rather effective) deputy: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/20/trump-fires-manhattan-prosecutor-who-refused-to-quit-330600 Geoffrey Berman, the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, is ending his standoff with Attorney General William Barr, stepping down voluntarily after Barr reversed course and named Berman's deputy to lead the powerful U. S. attorney's office.
“In light of Attorney General Barr’s decision to respect the normal operation of law and have Deputy U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss become Acting U.S. Attorney, I will be leaving the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, effective immediately," Berman said in a statement, following a tense 12-hour-period in which Barr twice sought to remove Berman, only to see his efforts frustrated...
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
At the time the Scottish were told that enduring poena cullei English was the only way for them to remain in the EU. JY Le Drian (French Foreign Minister) has recently said that an independent Scotland would have 'sa propre place' in the EU. There is no doubt they would have the quickest accession ever, if only to spite the English and to a lesser degree the Welsh.
Dominic Raab's enraged incomprehension at the start of the year as EU members have lined up to say Scotland would have an easy ascension was an absolute highlight.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
Scotlands rejoining the EU would be fairly seamless at present as alignment is there. It may not be in 5 years if the scorched earth Brexiteers get their way over the next few years. That is an argument supportive of Sindyref3 sooner rather than later, of course.
An interesting point. Though presumably those upset and worried that EU accession might take longer than they want if the Brexit changes make it so, would blame the UK for that and do stick with indy, eg it cancels itself out?
Very well written piece, Casino. I also happen to agree with it.
As an aside I have zero interest in Culture Wars. I kind of wish culture warriors actively participating on PB would lay off. It's an unfortunate part of our politics, so can we discuss it as a phenomenon - how it affects Trump's re-election etc - rather than fight it out on these pages?
We will all be stuck with it now the Conservative Party has realised Johnson will be a busted flush by the next election and have identified 'wokeism' as it's post Brexit target for all the nations ills.
Canadians, Brits & French least surprised that the BLM protests are taking place in the US. (Mr Page's comment about Trump not supported by the data presented):
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
The difference is rooted in American culture, an ingrained distrust of authority and government supported by the constitutional right to bear arms - in order to keep reminding those in charge that they are the servants of the nation, rather than the masters of it.
It's a very difficult place to police, when in almost every situation it has to be assumed that everyone is armed. How this gets de-escalated is the $64,000 question, but arming the police like they're the army definitely isn't the way to start.
I've recommended this article about 100 times. It's still worth reading:
Berman folds, perhaps because his replacement is now his (rather effective) deputy: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/20/trump-fires-manhattan-prosecutor-who-refused-to-quit-330600 Geoffrey Berman, the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, is ending his standoff with Attorney General William Barr, stepping down voluntarily after Barr reversed course and named Berman's deputy to lead the powerful U. S. attorney's office.
“In light of Attorney General Barr’s decision to respect the normal operation of law and have Deputy U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss become Acting U.S. Attorney, I will be leaving the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, effective immediately," Berman said in a statement, following a tense 12-hour-period in which Barr twice sought to remove Berman, only to see his efforts frustrated...
Thst whole statehouse business was insane. Unless it was reported and I missed it I'm amazed (or rather not) that the whole lot are not already serving very long prison sentences.
Didn't it turn out to be perfectly legitimate?
An angry mob brandishing military grade weapons and demanding the removal of elected officials looked more like a banana republic than the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
At the time the Scottish were told that enduring poena cullei English was the only way for them to remain in the EU. JY Le Drian (French Foreign Minister) has recently said that an independent Scotland would have 'sa propre place' in the EU. There is no doubt they would have the quickest accession ever, if only to spite the English and to a lesser degree the Welsh.
Dominic Raab's enraged incomprehension at the start of the year as EU members have lined up to say Scotland would have an easy ascension was an absolute highlight.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
Scotlands rejoining the EU would be fairly seamless at present as alignment is there. It may not be in 5 years if the scorched earth Brexiteers get their way over the next few years. That is an argument supportive of Sindyref3 sooner rather than later, of course.
This will bring out mind boggling hypocrisy from both remainers (like me) and leavers re a border with Scotland if Scotland is independent and in the EU. There will be U turns galore.
Leavers will highlight the problem as insurmountable (while NI is no issue at all, no absolutely not) while remainers will find it a hurdle easily solved (while NI is a completely insurmountable problem).
Until we do some serious constitutional reform these issues are only going to get worse. People who are unequal feel they are being treated unequally shock. How many groups does this apply to? A significant number of Scots. Half of NI. Yorkshire. Cornwall. Brexit voters. BAME people. We aren't the only state (not nation) who is multi-national, yet we seem to think that an unwritten made up as we go along fudge will do.
If we want to save the Union a Federal UK with written legal framework is the minimum requirement. That may not be enough to prevent nations departing, so do we create a Commonwealth which provides looser arrangements to accommodate Scotland and NI and perhaps gives some status to the absurdity of the Crown Dependencies.
There will never be a federal UK because the only way to make that work would be an English Parliament, and the party leaders in London will never have that because it doesn't suit them and their desire to wield untrammelled power. So to create a sustainable settlement the Union must be dissolved.
This would merely be a reflection of the new reality. The principle reason why the UK has lasted this long is the distribution of money from south-east to north-west. If the fiscal transfers were running into England rather than out of it then it wouldn't last another five seconds.
The Union is a zombie. The body is still alive and shambling around, but the soul has departed.
True, but it is inevitable as the UK cannot continue in its current form. I've been a proponent of Federalism for some time but going a step further than that with regionalism. Even if England was a nation state it is grossly unequal and under-represented outside of the Home Counties. The Brexit vote reflects this - unless we create regional government within England you cannot fix the issues.
So a Federal / Commonwealth UK. Where we have the component nations (I'd invite IoM and the Bailiwicks to join) who represent their interests together as a block but are largely free to organise themselves according to their local requirements. We'd need a new name as well as we are neither United nor a Kingdom...
Excellent header CR. One of the most important challenges in tackling racism is admitting it exists in the first place - compare the UK where 80%+ agree there is racism or intolerance in the country with Russia at barely 50% or Japan, less than 60%.
I think Johnson genuinely wants to keep the Union. He wouldn't be so adamantly opposed to a second referendum in Scotland otherwise. His rhetoric around the Union Flag and Global Britain support this.
Problem is, the actions and ideology of his Neo-UKIP government effectively breaks the Union apart. Toxic English nationalism doesn't play well in Scotland, obviously.
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
The difference is rooted in American culture, an ingrained distrust of authority and government supported by the constitutional right to bear arms - in order to keep reminding those in charge that they are the servants of the nation, rather than the masters of it.
It's a very difficult place to police, when in almost every situation it has to be assumed that everyone is armed. How this gets de-escalated is the $64,000 question, but arming the police like they're the army definitely isn't the way to start.
I've recommended this article about 100 times. It's still worth reading:
A very good long read. The question is how do they get hundreds of thousands of cops up to CIA levels of training and experience?
Yes, he’s an extraordinary individual, but perhaps not the model for the future of US policing. One thing he has very much in common with those advocating police reform (unfortunately, and misleadingly labelled defunding) is the need for policing to be embedded in the community being policed.
The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
The difference is rooted in American culture, an ingrained distrust of authority and government supported by the constitutional right to bear arms - in order to keep reminding those in charge that they are the servants of the nation, rather than the masters of it.
It's a very difficult place to police, when in almost every situation it has to be assumed that everyone is armed. How this gets de-escalated is the $64,000 question, but arming the police like they're the army definitely isn't the way to start.
I've recommended this article about 100 times. It's still worth reading:
A very good long read. The question is how do they get hundreds of thousands of cops up to CIA levels of training and experience?
The book Life Undercover by Amaryllis Fox will explain why it's just not possible. The agency is fanatically choosy about who it takes and then spares no expense or time in training them to a frankly astonishing level.
Speaking of being kinder to one another, I see Ash Sarkar is being piled on to because she tweeted a selfie of her eating an ice lolly in a park. Lads with UJs in their profile are calling her filth & forwarding pics of nooses for disrespecting the murdered people in Reading despite her tweet being posted well before those horrible events.
BLM & Marxists will be ultimately to blame of course.
Berman folds, perhaps because his replacement is now his (rather effective) deputy: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/20/trump-fires-manhattan-prosecutor-who-refused-to-quit-330600 Geoffrey Berman, the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, is ending his standoff with Attorney General William Barr, stepping down voluntarily after Barr reversed course and named Berman's deputy to lead the powerful U. S. attorney's office.
“In light of Attorney General Barr’s decision to respect the normal operation of law and have Deputy U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss become Acting U.S. Attorney, I will be leaving the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, effective immediately," Berman said in a statement, following a tense 12-hour-period in which Barr twice sought to remove Berman, only to see his efforts frustrated...
Boooooooooo.
Indeed. Particularly as Barr has the power to sack the successor, as she is appointed by him. Though interestingly, Lindsey Graham has said he will not vote to approve any new appointment without the agreement of the two NY senators (which used to be the custom, pre Trump). A sign of windsock Graham realising that power is draining away from the President ?
I think Johnson genuinely wants to keep the Union. He wouldn't be so adamantly opposed to a second referendum in Scotland otherwise. His rhetoric around the Union Flag and Global Britain support this.
Problem is, the actions and ideology of his Neo-UKIP government effectively breaks the Union apart. Toxic English nationalism doesn't play well in Scotland, obviously.
As I said earlier Scots Independence has gone on for generations and will continue for generations.
Maybe Berwick is the best example changing hands 13 times
However, I do agree Brexit and covid have introduced a new dimension
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
At the time the Scottish were told that enduring poena cullei English was the only way for them to remain in the EU. JY Le Drian (French Foreign Minister) has recently said that an independent Scotland would have 'sa propre place' in the EU. There is no doubt they would have the quickest accession ever, if only to spite the English and to a lesser degree the Welsh.
Dominic Raab's enraged incomprehension at the start of the year as EU members have lined up to say Scotland would have an easy ascension was an absolute highlight.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
Scotlands rejoining the EU would be fairly seamless at present as alignment is there. It may not be in 5 years if the scorched earth Brexiteers get their way over the next few years. That is an argument supportive of Sindyref3 sooner rather than later, of course.
This will bring out mind boggling hypocrisy from both remainers (like me) and leavers re a border with Scotland if Scotland is independent and in the EU. There will be U turns galore.
Leavers will highlight the problem as insurmountable (while NI is no issue at all, no absolutely not) while remainers will find it a hurdle easily solved (while NI is a completely insurmountable problem).
Some of us will acknowledge the whole thing is a big mess, and that we’ll have to make the best of it. While I recognise the right of Scotland to determine its own future, I would be sorry to see them go.
The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.
It will not and cannot be held together by force
Hence why I expect another referendum in the next couple of years or so but the economic reality will win over the dream
Covid, oil collapse, borders with England, the pound, etc will all result in the head ruling over the heart
A while back, under Cameron, the UK armed police started muttering about resignation. The cause was that the government wouldn't bring in protection against prosecution.
At that time being in the armed police was a volunteer job - quitting that would not effect their job as police officers.
There was talk of a mass resignation.
In the end, May (I think was home sec. at the time), changed the system, so that armed officers are employed specifically as part of their job. So resigning would mean out of the police service.
I remember that, at the time, this was seen as "an attack on the police", the government "losing the confidence of the police" etc etc.
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
The difference is rooted in American culture, an ingrained distrust of authority and government supported by the constitutional right to bear arms - in order to keep reminding those in charge that they are the servants of the nation, rather than the masters of it.
It's a very difficult place to police, when in almost every situation it has to be assumed that everyone is armed. How this gets de-escalated is the $64,000 question, but arming the police like they're the army definitely isn't the way to start.
Can we just disabuse ourselves please of one misconception regarding the widely misquoted 2nd Amendment.
It does indeed confer the right of citizens to bear arms but it does not restrict the State's right to stipulate what sort of arms and how and when they may be used. This is why you will be pulled up short should you try to park an Abrams tank on your front lawn or build a small thermonuclear device in your garden shed.
The State could restrict gun ownership much further than it does already without even coming close to offending either the letter or the spirit of the 2nd Amendment. It could for example ban assault weapons. That it does not do so is down to various reasons, some of which you mention, but largely because the NRA has the politicians by the short and curlies.
The NRA used to be in favour of gun control when it was being used to target Black Panthers.
Quite. It's a racist organisation.
Oh for President Biden to declare the KKK a terrorist organisation - for which there is more than ample evidence.
The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.
If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
The difference is rooted in American culture, an ingrained distrust of authority and government supported by the constitutional right to bear arms - in order to keep reminding those in charge that they are the servants of the nation, rather than the masters of it.
It's a very difficult place to police, when in almost every situation it has to be assumed that everyone is armed. How this gets de-escalated is the $64,000 question, but arming the police like they're the army definitely isn't the way to start.
I've recommended this article about 100 times. It's still worth reading:
A very good long read. The question is how do they get hundreds of thousands of cops up to CIA levels of training and experience?
The book Life Undercover by Amaryllis Fox will explain why it's just not possible. The agency is fanatically choosy about who it takes and then spares no expense or time in training them to a frankly astonishing level.
Of course. It’s like comparing Israeli airport security with the TSA goons.
The Americans do need to be more picky about selection and training of those with guns and badges though, even if the ideal is unattainable in practice.
The family of the investment banker who was ousted as chief executive of Barclays in the wake of the Libor-rigging scandal quietly pledged £50,000 to Boris Johnson during December’s election — but delayed the gift until February to avoid awkward headlines during the campaign.
Bob Diamond, who was forced to resign in 2012, days after Barclays paid a £290m fine for rigging the interbank lending rate, donated the sum to the Conservative Party on February 20, according to the Electoral Commission.
A source said that Diamond, who lives in New York but retains UK citizenship, pledged to give the Tories the money as they were preparing to do battle with Jeremy Corbyn three months earlier, but waited to transfer it.
The donation was made by Diamond’s son, who is also called Robert Edward Diamond and also has UK citizenship. The Electoral Commission publishes information about donations and loans four times a year — at the end of February, May, August and November.
Mr. Ace, leaving the UK would've also entailed leaving the EU.
The referendum pledge was known about at the time of the independence vote.
Had Scotland voted to leave would we now be discussing having another referendum? Of course not. But fanatics believe referendum results only count if they go the 'right' way.
At the time the Scottish were told that enduring poena cullei English was the only way for them to remain in the EU. JY Le Drian (French Foreign Minister) has recently said that an independent Scotland would have 'sa propre place' in the EU. There is no doubt they would have the quickest accession ever, if only to spite the English and to a lesser degree the Welsh.
Dominic Raab's enraged incomprehension at the start of the year as EU members have lined up to say Scotland would have an easy ascension was an absolute highlight.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
Scotlands rejoining the EU would be fairly seamless at present as alignment is there. It may not be in 5 years if the scorched earth Brexiteers get their way over the next few years. That is an argument supportive of Sindyref3 sooner rather than later, of course.
This will bring out mind boggling hypocrisy from both remainers (like me) and leavers re a border with Scotland if Scotland is independent and in the EU. There will be U turns galore.
Leavers will highlight the problem as insurmountable (while NI is no issue at all, no absolutely not) while remainers will find it a hurdle easily solved (while NI is a completely insurmountable problem).
Some of us will acknowledge the whole thing is a big mess, and that we’ll have to make the best of it.
Pretty much international SOP for several years now. It kills the 'stay with us for stability and continuity' fox stone dead.
The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.
It will not and cannot be held together by force
Hence why I expect another referendum in the next couple of years or so but the economic reality will win over the dream
Covid, oil collapse, borders with England, the pound, etc will all result in the head ruling over the heart
In short: Scotland wants rid of England, but it'll stay put because of the money.
Well, the arguments in favour of Scotland staying in the UK last time were mainly about money, and the arguments for the UK staying in the EU were almost entirely about money. One campaign worked, one didn't. We'll see what happens third time around, but it's bound to be close.
Speaking of being kinder to one another, I see Ash Sarkar is being piled on to because she tweeted a selfie of her eating an ice lolly in a park. Lads with UJs in their profile are calling her filth & forwarding pics of nooses for disrespecting the murdered people in Reading despite her tweet being posted well before those horrible events.
BLM & Marxists will be ultimately to blame of course.
It's nice to be able to agree with Ash Sarkar for a change.
1. The police are a paramilitary organisation. In the UK, or France, or Canada, or Italy, there is roughly a one-to-one ratio between the number of police killed by criminals, and the number of criminals (and others) killed by the police. In the US, more than 1,000 we're shot and killed by the police last year, and another 1,600 died in police custody. In total, 89 police were killed in the line of duty. That's a 30-1 ratio.
2. Behaviour, as CR has pointed out, is accepted from white people (such as donning assault weapons and occupying the state senate), that would not be accepted from African Americans. There is a legacy of racism in the US, going all the way back to slavery, that has not been eradicated.
Both these problems need to be solved. But they are separate issues.
Isn't that 30:1 ratio a reflection of the absurd gun laws though, Robert? If you are going to allow the public to arm themselves to the teeth them you are going to have a lot of them mown down by cops attempting to maintain order. Restrict the availability of guns and you immediately lessen the need for the police to use them.
It's not going to happen, we know, but that doesn't stop it from being bleeding obvious.
Yeah, except the Switzerland has a very similar level of private gun ownership the US and manages a 2.2:1 ratio.
Yeah, except ..... most of the private houses with guns have no ammunition.
You get 50 rounds to put in your sock drawer if you're an army reservist. So basically 2 mags for your SG550.
I think they stopped issuing ammunition to nearly all reservists a while ago.
But, you can privately buy ammunition in Switzerland....
In fact, IIRC you can buy ammunition for your military weapon at subsidised prices at government sponsored gun ranges.
The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.
If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
Many thanks to Casino for an interesting header which makes a real effort to consider the position open-mindedly. We rarely agree on much but I completely agree with him that intelligent dialogue rather than picking sides in a trench war is the way forward.
The family of the investment banker who was ousted as chief executive of Barclays in the wake of the Libor-rigging scandal quietly pledged £50,000 to Boris Johnson during December’s election — but delayed the gift until February to avoid awkward headlines during the campaign.
Bob Diamond, who was forced to resign in 2012, days after Barclays paid a £290m fine for rigging the interbank lending rate, donated the sum to the Conservative Party on February 20, according to the Electoral Commission.
A source said that Diamond, who lives in New York but retains UK citizenship, pledged to give the Tories the money as they were preparing to do battle with Jeremy Corbyn three months earlier, but waited to transfer it.
The donation was made by Diamond’s son, who is also called Robert Edward Diamond and also has UK citizenship. The Electoral Commission publishes information about donations and loans four times a year — at the end of February, May, August and November.
Excellent header CR. One of the most important challenges in tackling racism is admitting it exists in the first place - compare the UK where 80%+ agree there is racism or intolerance in the country with Russia at barely 50% or Japan, less than 60%.
The family of the investment banker who was ousted as chief executive of Barclays in the wake of the Libor-rigging scandal quietly pledged £50,000 to Boris Johnson during December’s election — but delayed the gift until February to avoid awkward headlines during the campaign.
Bob Diamond, who was forced to resign in 2012, days after Barclays paid a £290m fine for rigging the interbank lending rate, donated the sum to the Conservative Party on February 20, according to the Electoral Commission.
A source said that Diamond, who lives in New York but retains UK citizenship, pledged to give the Tories the money as they were preparing to do battle with Jeremy Corbyn three months earlier, but waited to transfer it.
The donation was made by Diamond’s son, who is also called Robert Edward Diamond and also has UK citizenship. The Electoral Commission publishes information about donations and loans four times a year — at the end of February, May, August and November.
The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.
If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
If Johnson rejects Indyref2 after a significant SNP win next year he shoots your argument down in flames.
The Union itself is the last vestige of Empire and we can only become a modern 21st Century nation by its dissolution. I wish this wasn’t the case but I’m beginning to realize it is. Those who believe the Union can be held together by force are deluded as well as downright immoral.
If it was still based on Empire there would still be direct rule of Scotland from Westminster, no Scottish MPs and no Holyrood and the 2014 indyref would not have been allowed
Who said anything about the Union being “based” on Empire?
Over the last two weeks I've contacted (privately) four people in my professional network of an African or Afro-Caribbean heritage. I actually had work-related reasons for contacting each, so it wasn't explicitly a social call.
None of them raised the protests with me. I initiated the subject in each situation. I asked them what they thought about what was going on.
What they all said was similar. They all started by being at pains to point out that the USA was not the UK. The UK isn't armed, the police don't have guns, and the UK doesn't have the same legacy issues. What they'd seen in the USA had upset them a lot, as had some of the violent riots in response to it, and they wanted to keep it in proportion but also for people to reflect on it.
They then said whilst it's nothing like as overt and bad in the UK as the USA, it still goes on here. People are more reserved and introverted here, so it's far more hidden. There's an "air" sometimes around them when they walk out, which they can sense, and it isn't always comfortable. The events in the USA have helped shine a bit of spotlight on this, from which they hope comes some good.
One said that whilst her race had never held her back, her 7 year old daughter in primary school has on at least three occasions had one or two other children say they don't want to play with her because she has a black mummy. Also (and I was really surprised by this) she works for a major private telecomms company and said they've been excellent but her husband works for the NHS and has encountered a very solid ceiling. She's convinced the NHS is racist. I gently challenged her on this "really?", but she was adamant: "the NHS is racist".
One man said that when he was at school (he wanted to be an engineer) the careers advisor said he'd never be a professional engineer, and advised him to be a mechanic instead. They assumed no ambition or dismissed what was there. So he had to work hard at night school later to get the qualifications to get him back on track. Many of his old school friends turned to crime and are now in jail, as they didn't feel they had much future and also had broken families at home, often with absent fathers.
They all said that the absence of black leaders at a very senior level in British organisations in a problem. They need to see some people like them at that level to show it's possible to everyone else. They also stressed the importance of mentoring and coaching. Two said they thought the UK was a bit obsessed at present with gender equality at corporate level, which was "squeezing out" attention from black role models and representation at that level.
None of them mentioned statues. When I asked one of them directly about she said that the 'past is the past' and 'it is what it is' but there might be a handful, like Christopher Columbus for example who didn't 'discover' America that are insensitive and need better qualification or possibly re-locating if it really sticks in the throat. However, this wasn't her priority: she's more interested in the future.
All seemed delighted I'd asked them about this and said they wanted to meet up for drinks and a chat socially soon, and really appreciated I'd listened to them.
It was they who convinced me I was correct to write this article in the way I did, and I'm pleased I spoke to them first before I did.
The painful conclusion is that Britain has the wrong sort of government for a pandemic—and, in Boris Johnson, the wrong sort of prime minister. Elected in December with the slogan of “Get Brexit Done”, he did not pay covid-19 enough attention. Ministers were chosen on ideological grounds; talented candidates with the wrong views were left out in the cold. Mr Johnson got the top job because he is a brilliant campaigner and a charismatic entertainer with whom the Conservative Party fell in love. Beating the coronavirus calls for attention to detail, consistency and implementation, but they are not his forte.
The pandemic has many lessons for the government, which the inevitable public inquiry will surely clarify. Here is one for voters: when choosing a person or party to vote for, do not underestimate the importance of ordinary, decent competence.
I note, by the way, a broad degree of agreement between both Remain and Leave commentators on the site about this being a high quality article with much to recommend it.
Maybe @Sean_F's two tribes have more in common than most of us admit.
Yes, I'm very pleased about that.
I think comparisons with Brexit can be overblown. I haven't noticed people splitting in quite that way on this issue, which is positive I think.
"A far more striking event last week was the way in which Premier League footballers, reopening the season in empty stadiums, wore shirts emblazoned with the slogan of the new universal Left, ‘Black Lives Matter’.
All – along with the referee and match officials – also ‘took the knee’, the sign of obeisance to the new ideology. And each player wore an NHS symbol, emblem of the new state-worship encouraged during the Government-sponsored panic over the Covid-19 virus.
As far as I know, none of those involved had any qualms about this. But if they had done, would they have dared express them, if they wished to continue in professional football?
Would the world have praised their conscientious courage, or would they have been hosed down with claims that they were ‘racists’ and then ‘cancelled’?
You know the answer as you ask the question.
Who doesn’t think black lives matter? Who doesn’t value the NHS? But that is not what these displays mean. They are about particular ways of holding those views, ways which lead relentlessly to intolerance of dissent, to the enforcement – by threats to the livelihoods of dissenters – of a single set of acceptable opinions.
And, as I found last Tuesday, it is not enough to keep quiet. If you are suspected of thinking the wrong thing, they will come and cancel you anyway.
I now think this is just a matter of time. Prepare to be cancelled."
The family of the investment banker who was ousted as chief executive of Barclays in the wake of the Libor-rigging scandal quietly pledged £50,000 to Boris Johnson during December’s election — but delayed the gift until February to avoid awkward headlines during the campaign.
Bob Diamond, who was forced to resign in 2012, days after Barclays paid a £290m fine for rigging the interbank lending rate, donated the sum to the Conservative Party on February 20, according to the Electoral Commission.
A source said that Diamond, who lives in New York but retains UK citizenship, pledged to give the Tories the money as they were preparing to do battle with Jeremy Corbyn three months earlier, but waited to transfer it.
The donation was made by Diamond’s son, who is also called Robert Edward Diamond and also has UK citizenship. The Electoral Commission publishes information about donations and loans four times a year — at the end of February, May, August and November.
The irony was that Bob Diamond actually did the right thing over the Libor scandal.
Instead of stone walling, or just chucking the immediate evidence (when it was first discovered) at the police, he set up a special unit in the bank that worked with the regulators and police to trawl though all the records to find all the guilty parties. In fact they caught a number of other offences while they were at it.
This led to finding evidence against and prosecution of a number of people, not just inside Barclays.
Great piece CR, very thoughtful on a subject that has been worrying me greatly too. Did you pull your punches a bit, maybe? I`d have been harder-hitting I think. Best part: " I’m worried some of their actions might move us away from building a society that is colour blind to one that is colour obsessed, and frustrate understanding rather than building it".
No, I think pulling punches is essential in the current environment; the alternative is mutual escalation. I think that is what makes it a good piece.
Thank you, I've tried to be as balanced as I can be.
Mr Johnson got the top job because he is a brilliant campaigner and a charismatic entertainer with whom the Conservative Party fell in love. Beating the coronavirus calls for attention to detail, consistency and implementation, but they are not his forte.
The pandemic has many lessons for the government, which the inevitable public inquiry will surely clarify. Here is one for voters: when choosing a person or party to vote for, do not underestimate the importance of ordinary, decent competence.
Under the old order I would have been regarded 'liberal left' but even I can see that this is turning in to a choice between living in Putins Russia or the Khymer Rouge.
The option of living in a state where you can keep your head down and avoid trouble but stay secure, retain some sense of personal, private freedom is, when all things are considered, preferable over living in an intrusive revolutionary state which seeks to remake human nature.
Both are awful choices. By contrast, the liberal Britain that we knew and has existed for most of our lifetimes was a utopia. But right now it feels like it is lost forever. It wont be saved by bowing to the mob.
Sorry to depress you all on Sunday morning. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it.
In contrast with the thoughtful and well-considered thread header, this is melodramatic twaddle. The incipient "communist" revolution you refer to has barely been noticed by most people, who do indeed just get on with their lives much as ever. Very few protesters wish to overthrow the state; probably the same tiny number on the far left and the far right. The vast majority of peaceful protesters just want a fairer society, simple as that.
On the thread header, Casino Royale has written a good, classically liberal let's all be kind and colour blind piece. Hard to disagree with the thrust of this, but I'm less sure about the solutions. He acknowledges that there may be residual racial prejudice amongst 15%-25% of the population - really, a very high number if he's right, and I suspect he is. What precisely is to be done about this - I don't think appealing to such people to be colour blind will really cut it.
I guess my main quibble is that in quite a long thread header the word power does not feature once. Any solution to our current woes surely needs to contain some analysis of power - who has it, in whose interest is it used, and how can it be more evenly distributed to challenge both real and perceived (racial) injustice.
I do think advantage exists. I'd say it lies with those with money, stable families, those who live in safe areas and (this one isn't mentioned very much) with physically attractive and articulate people.
I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.
My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
Excellent article, but occasionally it is veering into a wish list, and it is not easy to disagree with the thought that "it's time we all found a way to get along."
But what about this. CR says: "In a liberal society speech is what we use...". I agree. But loads don't. For extremists of every sort - left, right, religious, woke, no-platformers, climate campaigners, single issue fanatics and so on - the liberal society is not the solution, it is the problem. The place people give to liberal values is more or less the simple way if identifying an extremist, whether it is Trump, the BNP, SWP, XR, Hamas or whatever.
How will CR defend his (and my) liberal values against those who say it has failed to deliver anything like justice (or whatever) and isn't going to? There are a lot of anti-liberals around.
Thanks. I don't have many of the answers but, yes, it was a piece looking to defend the core values of a liberal society.
What pleases me is how so many from across the political divide seem to broadly agree with that.
A really excellent piece. I am sick fed up being told I live in a racist country by some people who are either not British citizens or have contributed very little to civic society.
Racism in all its forms is abhorant. If we are going to teach about slavery which led to millions of Africans being transported to the West Indies and Southern States are we also going to teach about the indigenous African tribes who sold their fellow countrymen to white Europeans because they fetched a higher price than selling them to Arabs! Are we going to address the fact that slavery is still endemic in some parts of the African continent.
Expecting "white Europeans"to "give the knee" is absurd. It is a form of protest adopted by black US basketball players and other sportsmen to quite properly highlight the appalling treatment they receive in THEIR own country. Listening to an overseas student at Oxford demand that Cecil Rhodes statue be removed made my blood boil. No-one asked him to come and study in the UK, he chose to!
As for the rush for reparations etc, are we going to bulldoze the centre of Bristol, Liverpool and Glasgow, all built on the proceeds of slavery! Are we going to pull down Hadrian's Wall and demand reparation from Italy because the Romans slaughtered millions of Britons during their almost 500 year occupation of our islands?
I live with the heritage of colonial slavery every day. Like ALL other Highland families we are steeped in it. Look at the names of the plantations in Jamaica or St Vincent. You will find they are named after almost every village or town round the Moray Firth in the Scottish Highlands. For the last 2-3 years I have made contact with or been contacted by mixed race cousins who are themselves the descendants of a white plantation owner/manager and a black freed or slave woman. With absolutely no sense of grievance they are keen to share with me, their cousin, their particular family story and learn about our shared family history back to the Norman Conquest. My cousins are my cousins, whether they be products of the union of a white master and black slave woman in St Vincent or a young white officer in the Honourable East India Company and the daughter of a Maharaja.
We need to stop looking at history through the moral views of the 21st century and address the issues of today - health, housing and education and why black British people tend to do badly in access to or sharing off these resources. That will of course also require our black community to face up to why when we hear of a teenager being needlessly shot or killed in London, all too often she or he is a black teenager and the perpetrator is also a black teenager. As I said at the start, racism of all kinds is abhorrent but racism comes in many guises and colours!!
As for Trump, he is simply beyond the pale but from his recent comments I have to say Biden is little better.
Good post.
Very good post actually, but people don't want reality , they just want to be angry about something from 200 years ago and want paid for it.
The painful conclusion is that Britain has the wrong sort of government for a pandemic—and, in Boris Johnson, the wrong sort of prime minister. Elected in December with the slogan of “Get Brexit Done”, he did not pay covid-19 enough attention. Ministers were chosen on ideological grounds; talented candidates with the wrong views were left out in the cold. Mr Johnson got the top job because he is a brilliant campaigner and a charismatic entertainer with whom the Conservative Party fell in love. Beating the coronavirus calls for attention to detail, consistency and implementation, but they are not his forte.
The pandemic has many lessons for the government, which the inevitable public inquiry will surely clarify. Here is one for voters: when choosing a person or party to vote for, do not underestimate the importance of ordinary, decent competence.
I don't know how we can usefully measure actual competence in politicians however. There are certainly key signs of genuine incompetence, but competence is trickier. Someone good in opposition might not be in government, but how can we know until they are there? Someone might have done poorly in one ministerial position, but thrive in another. Perhaps they were an expert lawyer or journalist, but poor as a legislator. Maybe they are an expert on legislation but terrible at party management.
Much as I would criticise the public for going on their gut, I don't think it is realistic to expect a judgement based on simple competence. All government is a little crappy after all.
A "colour blind" society is a farcical and offensive proposition. It's saying you can you only treat BAME people with respect as long you don't realise they are BAME.
I do agree with @whunter's proposition is that the old order is being swept away and will not return. Unlike them, I give it full throated welcome.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Martin Luther King, 1963
Was he advocating an offensive proposition to black people?
Under the old order I would have been regarded 'liberal left' but even I can see that this is turning in to a choice between living in Putins Russia or the Khymer Rouge.
The option of living in a state where you can keep your head down and avoid trouble but stay secure, retain some sense of personal, private freedom is, when all things are considered, preferable over living in an intrusive revolutionary state which seeks to remake human nature.
Both are awful choices. By contrast, the liberal Britain that we knew and has existed for most of our lifetimes was a utopia. But right now it feels like it is lost forever. It wont be saved by bowing to the mob.
Sorry to depress you all on Sunday morning. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it.
In contrast with the thoughtful and well-considered thread header, this is melodramatic twaddle. The incipient "communist" revolution you refer to has barely been noticed by most people, who do indeed just get on with their lives much as ever. Very few protesters wish to overthrow the state; probably the same tiny number on the far left and the far right. The vast majority of peaceful protesters just want a fairer society, simple as that.
On the thread header, Casino Royale has written a good, classically liberal let's all be kind and colour blind piece. Hard to disagree with the thrust of this, but I'm less sure about the solutions. He acknowledges that there may be residual racial prejudice amongst 15%-25% of the population - really, a very high number if he's right, and I suspect he is. What precisely is to be done about this - I don't think appealing to such people to be colour blind will really cut it.
I guess my main quibble is that in quite a long thread header the word power does not feature once. Any solution to our current woes surely needs to contain some analysis of power - who has it, in whose interest is it used, and how can it be more evenly distributed to challenge both real and perceived (racial) injustice.
I do think advantage exists. I'd say it lies with those with money, stable families, those who live in safe areas and (this one isn't mentioned very much) with physically attractive and articulate people.
I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.
My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
To what do you attribute the growing disparity in outcomes for recent immigrants from Africa and the older black community?
It is quite noticeable, that when you work with black people in high end white collar jobs, that you find they are nearly always from the former group.
The first order reason for this is education - such jobs are now only open to the holders of a 2.1 or 1st from a Russell Group university.
What is the reason that that there is such a disparity in educational outcomes?
I see HYUFD's last hope (the genuinely very reasonable assumption which I share that is Don't Knows will vote No in a future SindyRef) is on a shoogly peg as the raw figure was Yes 50% No 43% DK 7%
So 50% 50% on that basis, still certainly no grounds for another indyref and not respecting the 'once in a generation' referendum of 2014
You are like a broken record Pinochet/Franco wannabe
A "colour blind" society is a farcical and offensive proposition. It's saying you can you only treat BAME people with respect as long you don't realise they are BAME.
I do agree with @whunter's proposition is that the old order is being swept away and will not return. Unlike them, I give it full throated welcome.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Martin Luther King, 1963
Was he advocating an offensive proposition to black people?
Until we do some serious constitutional reform these issues are only going to get worse. People who are unequal feel they are being treated unequally shock. How many groups does this apply to? A significant number of Scots. Half of NI. Yorkshire. Cornwall. Brexit voters. BAME people. We aren't the only state (not nation) who is multi-national, yet we seem to think that an unwritten made up as we go along fudge will do.
If we want to save the Union a Federal UK with written legal framework is the minimum requirement. That may not be enough to prevent nations departing, so do we create a Commonwealth which provides looser arrangements to accommodate Scotland and NI and perhaps gives some status to the absurdity of the Crown Dependencies.
There will never be a federal UK because the only way to make that work would be an English Parliament, and the party leaders in London will never have that because it doesn't suit them and their desire to wield untrammelled power. So to create a sustainable settlement the Union must be dissolved.
This would merely be a reflection of the new reality. The principle reason why the UK has lasted this long is the distribution of money from south-east to north-west. If the fiscal transfers were running into England rather than out of it then it wouldn't last another five seconds.
The Union is a zombie. The body is still alive and shambling around, but the soul has departed.
I'm not sure there's much more that can be done about the Union. It will succeed or fail on its own merits.
At the end of the day, if Scotland really wants to leave, then they should be free to do so.
I will be very upset about that, and I think it's a big mistake (I also think England may still be blamed regardless post-independence if it isn't a nirvana) but we're not Spain and we won't maintain it by force.
A "colour blind" society is a farcical and offensive proposition. It's saying you can you only treat BAME people with respect as long you don't realise they are BAME.
I do agree with @whunter's proposition is that the old order is being swept away and will not return. Unlike them, I give it full throated welcome.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." Martin Luther King, 1963
Was he advocating an offensive proposition to black people?
" No amount of gold could provide an adequate compensation for the exploitation and humiliation of the Negro in America down through the centuries. Not all the wealth of this affluent society could meet the bill. Yet a price can be placed on unpaid wages. The ancient common law has always provided a remedy for the appropriation of the labor of one human being by another. This law should be made to apply for American Negroes. The payment should be in the form of a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law"
Why is it people can only remember the one bit of King's speeches and writings which they can interpret as meaning they have to do nothing?
Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?
That was six years ago.
MD , you are talking utter and complete bollox, a generation in politics is a parliament and many have passed since then. It is for the people of Scotland when they decide if they want to leave a union of "supposed" equals.
Excellent header CR. One of the most important challenges in tackling racism is admitting it exists in the first place - compare the UK where 80%+ agree there is racism or intolerance in the country with Russia at barely 50% or Japan, less than 60%.
Mr. Pioneers, you remember the Scots voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote, right?
That was six years ago.
They voted to stay in the UK that was part of the EU. Johnson upended that ludo board into the fireplace and is a sufficiently fundamental change that another referendum is warranted if they ask for it.
How long is a "generation" anyway?
Can I refer Mr Dancer back to the basic point which is that it is not up to England what Scotland does in a Union of Equals. If events mean Scotland changes it's mind then fine. The Union in question only came into being at the 4th attempt. We had two re-elections before the end of the 2015 parliament because the party who won the 2015 election didn't like the result...
Yes. And we can safely assume that a second referendum in Scotland that resulted in a second No vote would result in the defeated side starting the campaign for a third vote the next day. And, because they have a solid grip on the Scottish Parliament, they'd get it before many more years had passed. And then, if necessary, a fourth, fifth and sixth. Rinse, repeat.
This is just one of the reasons why we should hope for and embrace the end of the Union. It would bring clarity, and resolve a lot of problems.
It's not inevitable that support for indy will remain so high. I think it will and the union will end, but that doesnt mean I think union supporters should give up because indy supporters will keep trying and probably win in the end.
They probably will, but they need to work for it.
And it's a bit strange to assume the clarification and resolution of problems which would occur would not also potentially create a bunch of issues as well. Many people believe on balance it would be worth it and fair enough, embracing the end doesnt end problems.
Does not justify England's governments current attitude or the Scottish Government meekly accepting it.
Under the old order I would have been regarded 'liberal left' but even I can see that this is turning in to a choice between living in Putins Russia or the Khymer Rouge.
The option of living in a state where you can keep your head down and avoid trouble but stay secure, retain some sense of personal, private freedom is, when all things are considered, preferable over living in an intrusive revolutionary state which seeks to remake human nature.
Both are awful choices. By contrast, the liberal Britain that we knew and has existed for most of our lifetimes was a utopia. But right now it feels like it is lost forever. It wont be saved by bowing to the mob.
Sorry to depress you all on Sunday morning. Enjoy your freedom while you still have it.
In contrast with the thoughtful and well-considered thread header, this is melodramatic twaddle. The incipient "communist" revolution you refer to has barely been noticed by most people, who do indeed just get on with their lives much as ever. Very few protesters wish to overthrow the state; probably the same tiny number on the far left and the far right. The vast majority of peaceful protesters just want a fairer society, simple as that.
On the thread header, Casino Royale has written a good, classically liberal let's all be kind and colour blind piece. Hard to disagree with the thrust of this, but I'm less sure about the solutions. He acknowledges that there may be residual racial prejudice amongst 15%-25% of the population - really, a very high number if he's right, and I suspect he is. What precisely is to be done about this - I don't think appealing to such people to be colour blind will really cut it.
I guess my main quibble is that in quite a long thread header the word power does not feature once. Any solution to our current woes surely needs to contain some analysis of power - who has it, in whose interest is it used, and how can it be more evenly distributed to challenge both real and perceived (racial) injustice.
I do think advantage exists. I'd say it lies with those with money, stable families, those who live in safe areas and (this one isn't mentioned very much) with physically attractive and articulate people.
I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.
My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
To what do you attribute the growing disparity in outcomes for recent immigrants from Africa and the older black community?
It is quite noticeable, that when you work with black people in high end white collar jobs, that you find they are nearly always from the former group.
The first order reason for this is education - such jobs are now only open to the holders of a 2.1 or 1st from a Russell Group university.
What is the reason that that there is such a disparity in educational outcomes?
I think if you work with white people in high end white collar jobs you will find the same disparity and your reasoning as to why. Why are only black people disadvantaged by education failings, all you ever see is that white working class boys are at bottom of education pile.
Excellent article, but occasionally it is veering into a wish list, and it is not easy to disagree with the thought that "it's time we all found a way to get along."
But what about this. CR says: "In a liberal society speech is what we use...". I agree. But loads don't. For extremists of every sort - left, right, religious, woke, no-platformers, climate campaigners, single issue fanatics and so on - the liberal society is not the solution, it is the problem. The place people give to liberal values is more or less the simple way if identifying an extremist, whether it is Trump, the BNP, SWP, XR, Hamas or whatever.
How will CR defend his (and my) liberal values against those who say it has failed to deliver anything like justice (or whatever) and isn't going to? There are a lot of anti-liberals around.
Thanks. I don't have many of the answers but, yes, it was a piece looking to defend the core values of a liberal society.
What pleases me is how so many from across the political divide seem to broadly agree with that.
Thanks for this. There is a need for liberals to make common cause. It is what unites SKS and Boris Johnson. Perhaps we lack a language or vocabulary to express this common cause of support for free speech, the democratic process and the rule of law against the unconscious alliance of its opponents. It is difficult for people to imagine that a large number of causes, including some with individually worthy aims like anti-racism, actually share a common anti-liberal ground and that some racists (eg BNP) and anti-racists (SWP and the anti democratic left) are in fact sharing an anti-liberal platform. And they each have a hidden agenda of wanting their own way to the exclusion of other opinions.
Comments
They probably will, but they need to work for it.
And it's a bit strange to assume the clarification and resolution of problems which would occur would not also potentially create a bunch of issues as well. Many people believe on balance it would be worth it and fair enough, embracing the end doesnt end problems.
The dawning realisation that not being a member of the EU meant no solidarity from other EU members on territorial integrity was priceless.
As an aside I have zero interest in Culture Wars. I kind of wish culture warriors actively participating on PB would lay off. It's an unfortunate part of our politics, so can we discuss it as a phenomenon - how it affects Trump's re-election etc - rather than fight it out on these pages?
If we want to save the Union a Federal UK with written legal framework is the minimum requirement. That may not be enough to prevent nations departing, so do we create a Commonwealth which provides looser arrangements to accommodate Scotland and NI and perhaps gives some status to the absurdity of the Crown Dependencies.
I too recoil from the idea that “race identity is paramount”, but you can’t deny the importance of cultural identity, and that, like the colour of you skin, is bound up with where you came from.
Actions have reactions. Johnson's USP is that by wrapping himself in the flag of St. George he becomes more popular, but by doing that he unwraps
a latent English nationalism. Amongst other things this makes many more Scots realise English nationalism does nothing for them.
Johnson is a great recruiting sergeant for neutral Scots to become more
minded towards an independent Scotland.
https://twitter.com/guardianopinion/status/1274617559875125248?s=19
This is a good message. While the article is earnest, and this is a tricky topic to write about, I'm afraid I think the author needs to do more listening to those protesting.
I dont think the protests are saying, there's a small minority of racists who need to change. I don't think they are saying the UK is the most racist country in the world.
I do think they are saying there are systematic biases in our society we have to deal with. And that it's not enough to say I am not racist so I have nothing more to do. (And in some way we probably all are a bit racist unfortunately).
On the relationship between BLM UK, anti capitalism... this economist article was interesting reading: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.economist.com/britain/2020/06/20/what-next-for-black-lives-matter-uk
https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1273962870120857601?s=20
This would merely be a reflection of the new reality. The principle reason why the UK has lasted this long is the distribution of money from south-east to north-west. If the fiscal transfers were running into England rather than out of it then it wouldn't last another five seconds.
The Union is a zombie. The body is still alive and shambling around, but the soul has departed.
https://twitter.com/parscale/status/1258388669544759296
It was literally blown up by some kids with cell phones
Their quest was there long before we joined the EU, continued throughout our membership, and will not stop ad infinitum
I am very much in favour of allowing Scotland another referendum if the SNP win Holyrood next year on a manifesto promise to hold another referendum and would hope it would be agreed to be held by no later than mid 2022
However, the SNP are very much flavour of the month in Scotland but once the reality of the divorce becomes obvious, not least the economic covid damage and collapse of oil due to climate change, together with a hard border between Berwick and Carlisle complicating the 60% of Scots exports to England, the negatives will outweigh the positives by some distance
Add in the issues over the pound, the delay between exit and admission to EU membership it is likely to continue to be just a dream for many Scots
To be honest can anyone really see a hard Scots border with custom controls and currency exchanges for the euro to the pound and visa versa and also Scotland's geographic position and distance from Europe.
And I would add this is IMHO
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/20/trump-fires-manhattan-prosecutor-who-refused-to-quit-330600
Geoffrey Berman, the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, is ending his standoff with Attorney General William Barr, stepping down voluntarily after Barr reversed course and named Berman's deputy to lead the powerful U. S. attorney's office.
“In light of Attorney General Barr’s decision to respect the normal operation of law and have Deputy U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss become Acting U.S. Attorney, I will be leaving the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, effective immediately," Berman said in a statement, following a tense 12-hour-period in which Barr twice sought to remove Berman, only to see his efforts frustrated...
https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1274009637700939783?s=20
An angry mob brandishing military grade weapons and demanding the removal of elected officials looked more like a banana republic than the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Leavers will highlight the problem as insurmountable (while NI is no issue at all, no absolutely not) while remainers will find it a hurdle easily solved (while NI is a completely insurmountable problem).
So a Federal / Commonwealth UK. Where we have the component nations (I'd invite IoM and the Bailiwicks to join) who represent their interests together as a block but are largely free to organise themselves according to their local requirements. We'd need a new name as well as we are neither United nor a Kingdom...
“The West Indian or Asian does not, by being born in England, become an Englishman.”
Problem is, the actions and ideology of his Neo-UKIP government effectively breaks the Union apart. Toxic English nationalism doesn't play well in Scotland, obviously.
One thing he has very much in common with those advocating police reform (unfortunately, and misleadingly labelled defunding) is the need for policing to be embedded in the community being policed.
He genuinely doesn't want to be the PM that breaks up the Union.
I don't think he cares if it happens on someone else's watch
BLM & Marxists will be ultimately to blame of course.
Though interestingly, Lindsey Graham has said he will not vote to approve any new appointment without the agreement of the two NY senators (which used to be the custom, pre Trump).
A sign of windsock Graham realising that power is draining away from the President ?
Maybe Berwick is the best example changing hands 13 times
However, I do agree Brexit and covid have introduced a new dimension
While I recognise the right of Scotland to determine its own future, I would be sorry to see them go.
Hence why I expect another referendum in the next couple of years or so but the economic reality will win over the dream
Covid, oil collapse, borders with England, the pound, etc will all result in the head ruling over the heart
Any argument is about degree, not principle.
A while back, under Cameron, the UK armed police started muttering about resignation. The cause was that the government wouldn't bring in protection against prosecution.
At that time being in the armed police was a volunteer job - quitting that would not effect their job as police officers.
There was talk of a mass resignation.
In the end, May (I think was home sec. at the time), changed the system, so that armed officers are employed specifically as part of their job. So resigning would mean out of the police service.
I remember that, at the time, this was seen as "an attack on the police", the government "losing the confidence of the police" etc etc.
Doesn't seem quite the same now, does it?
The Americans do need to be more picky about selection and training of those with guns and badges though, even if the ideal is unattainable in practice.
The family of the investment banker who was ousted as chief executive of Barclays in the wake of the Libor-rigging scandal quietly pledged £50,000 to Boris Johnson during December’s election — but delayed the gift until February to avoid awkward headlines during the campaign.
Bob Diamond, who was forced to resign in 2012, days after Barclays paid a £290m fine for rigging the interbank lending rate, donated the sum to the Conservative Party on February 20, according to the Electoral Commission.
A source said that Diamond, who lives in New York but retains UK citizenship, pledged to give the Tories the money as they were preparing to do battle with Jeremy Corbyn three months earlier, but waited to transfer it.
The donation was made by Diamond’s son, who is also called Robert Edward Diamond and also has UK citizenship. The Electoral Commission publishes information about donations and loans four times a year — at the end of February, May, August and November.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/disgraced-bank-boss-bob-diamonds-50-000-gift-to-tories-gpc8hbktc
https://twitter.com/ashcowburn/status/1274601736062337024?s=20
I hope his quarantine on return to the UK is policed robustly.....
Well, the arguments in favour of Scotland staying in the UK last time were mainly about money, and the arguments for the UK staying in the EU were almost entirely about money. One campaign worked, one didn't. We'll see what happens third time around, but it's bound to be close.
https://twitter.com/AyoCaesar/status/1274613065175248897
But, you can privately buy ammunition in Switzerland....
In fact, IIRC you can buy ammunition for your military weapon at subsidised prices at government sponsored gun ranges.
2 questions for him.
Does he support the union
Will he agree to indy2 but campaign against
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8443777/Tory-MPs-rebel-ministers-rebuff-vital-1-3bn-lagoon-plan.html
1 of 2
I have done a bit of listening.
Over the last two weeks I've contacted (privately) four people in my professional network of an African or Afro-Caribbean heritage. I actually had work-related reasons for contacting each, so it wasn't explicitly a social call.
None of them raised the protests with me. I initiated the subject in each situation. I asked them what they thought about what was going on.
What they all said was similar. They all started by being at pains to point out that the USA was not the UK. The UK isn't armed, the police don't have guns, and the UK doesn't have the same legacy issues. What they'd seen in the USA had upset them a lot, as had some of the violent riots in response to it, and they wanted to keep it in proportion but also for people to reflect on it.
They then said whilst it's nothing like as overt and bad in the UK as the USA, it still goes on here. People are more reserved and introverted here, so it's far more hidden. There's an "air" sometimes around them when they walk out, which they can sense, and it isn't always comfortable. The events in the USA have helped shine a bit of spotlight on this, from which they hope comes some good.
One said that whilst her race had never held her back, her 7 year old daughter in primary school has on at least three occasions had one or two other children say they don't want to play with her because she has a black mummy. Also (and I was really surprised by this) she works for a major private telecomms company and said they've been excellent but her husband works for the NHS and has encountered a very solid ceiling. She's convinced the NHS is racist. I gently challenged her on this "really?", but she was adamant: "the NHS is racist".
One man said that when he was at school (he wanted to be an engineer) the careers advisor said he'd never be a professional engineer, and advised him to be a mechanic instead. They assumed no ambition or dismissed what was there. So he had to work hard at night school later to get the qualifications to get him back on track. Many of his old school friends turned to crime and are now in jail, as they didn't feel they had much future and also had broken families at home, often with absent fathers.
2 of 2
They all said that the absence of black leaders at a very senior level in British organisations in a problem. They need to see some people like them at that level to show it's possible to everyone else. They also stressed the importance of mentoring and coaching. Two said they thought the UK was a bit obsessed at present with gender equality at corporate level, which was "squeezing out" attention from black role models and representation at that level.
None of them mentioned statues. When I asked one of them directly about she said that the 'past is the past' and 'it is what it is' but there might be a handful, like Christopher Columbus for example who didn't 'discover' America that are insensitive and need better qualification or possibly re-locating if it really sticks in the throat. However, this wasn't her priority: she's more interested in the future.
All seemed delighted I'd asked them about this and said they wanted to meet up for drinks and a chat socially soon, and really appreciated I'd listened to them.
It was they who convinced me I was correct to write this article in the way I did, and I'm pleased I spoke to them first before I did.
The pandemic has many lessons for the government, which the inevitable public inquiry will surely clarify. Here is one for voters: when choosing a person or party to vote for, do not underestimate the importance of ordinary, decent competence.
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/06/18/britain-has-the-wrong-government-for-the-covid-crisis
I think comparisons with Brexit can be overblown. I haven't noticed people splitting in quite that way on this issue, which is positive I think.
All – along with the referee and match officials – also ‘took the knee’, the sign of obeisance to the new ideology. And each player wore an NHS symbol, emblem of the new state-worship encouraged during the Government-sponsored panic over the Covid-19 virus.
As far as I know, none of those involved had any qualms about this. But if they had done, would they have dared express them, if they wished to continue in professional football?
Would the world have praised their conscientious courage, or would they have been hosed down with claims that they were ‘racists’ and then ‘cancelled’?
You know the answer as you ask the question.
Who doesn’t think black lives matter? Who doesn’t value the NHS? But that is not what these displays mean. They are about particular ways of holding those views, ways which lead relentlessly to intolerance of dissent, to the enforcement – by threats to the livelihoods of dissenters – of a single set of acceptable opinions.
And, as I found last Tuesday, it is not enough to keep quiet. If you are suspected of thinking the wrong thing, they will come and cancel you anyway.
I now think this is just a matter of time. Prepare to be cancelled."
https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
Instead of stone walling, or just chucking the immediate evidence (when it was first discovered) at the police, he set up a special unit in the bank that worked with the regulators and police to trawl though all the records to find all the guilty parties. In fact they caught a number of other offences while they were at it.
This led to finding evidence against and prosecution of a number of people, not just inside Barclays.
"Few of us are motivated by conflict", you say. Maybe, but Conflict Theory is a thing, and Marxists seems to be quite strongly motivated by it.
https://www.zmescience.com/other/feature-post/what-is-conflict-theory-19092019/
I think it is still the case that an RP accent is sometimes conflated with being articulate and educated in this country, whereas that is far from the case. However, it is also not an excuse to be *inarticulate* - i.e you can be educated and articulate, with good English and diction, in a variety of accents - and we shouldn't conflate the two, or else it can hold people back.
My sense is that too many people simply let their unconscious bias make subjective decisions about black people almost automatically, and this hinders their fair treatment.
What pleases me is how so many from across the political divide seem to broadly agree with that.
Much as I would criticise the public for going on their gut, I don't think it is realistic to expect a judgement based on simple competence. All government is a little crappy after all.
Was he advocating an offensive proposition to black people?
It is quite noticeable, that when you work with black people in high end white collar jobs, that you find they are nearly always from the former group.
The first order reason for this is education - such jobs are now only open to the holders of a 2.1 or 1st from a Russell Group university.
What is the reason that that there is such a disparity in educational outcomes?
At the end of the day, if Scotland really wants to leave, then they should be free to do so.
I will be very upset about that, and I think it's a big mistake (I also think England may still be blamed regardless post-independence if it isn't a nirvana) but we're not Spain and we won't maintain it by force.
Why is it people can only remember the one bit of King's speeches and writings which they can interpret as meaning they have to do nothing?
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/biden-trump-electioin-doug-schoen