I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
For 4 billion quid they should knock the fucking thing down and build a new one somewhere cheap and horrible like Doncaster.
Build a new one maybe but don't knock the old one down.
Parliament is a worldwide icon for the UK. A tourist hotspot. Flash up an image of the Houses of Parliament in the USA and people will instantly identify it with London.
Knocking it down would be like the Parisians knocking down the Eiffel Tower.
Refurbish it and open it to tourists and you'd easily make back £4 billion in tourist revenue within a few years.
For anyone who doesn't believe me that £5bn is sod all, it's a grand total of 7% of HS2.
Even if we ignore the spiralling cost of HS2, it's still an extraordinarily small amount of money to make a big speech about. Presumably it sounds large and is a vote winner.
You have it the wrong way round. It doesn't make £5bn sod all, it makes HS2 eyewateringly too fucking expensive.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
It's a historical site worthy of restoration even if it's not used for a legislature. We wont bulldoze salisbury cathedral because church attendances are decreasing, and these days at least we dont destroy old sites just because they are not used . In fact it is not permitted to let such things run down deliberately
Westminster Hall is a ' historical site worthy of restoration' unquestionably, and there's a lot to be said for the Elizabeth Tower and Big Ben, but the rest is Victorian Gothic and if it's unsafe......
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Wasn’t Amerigo Vespucci a racist? We should rename those two continents.
In his book The Silk Roads Peter Frankopan refers to a pretty unsavoury incident in which Vespucci allows a group of Islamic pilgrims to perish at sea. Not sure it was specifically racist, but if true very nasty indeed, even by the standards of the day.
I understand Columbus was a bit of a nutter too, but then other periods, other standards.
I get the impression that most high profile characters throughout history have been total nutters. And history hasn’t stopped.
Simon Sharma reckoned you had to be a manic-depressive to cut it as a colonial leader. I think he had Clive of India particularly in mind but plenty of others had the same trait.
Bars, clubs and gyms is not exactly a total lockdown.
Not yet
I wouldn't mind betting that pubs (inside at least) will shut again before August. Hardly anybody is bothering with masks or social distancing inside shops as it is Once the pubs reopen you may as well throw in the towel and wait for the next lockdown to come along.
The US seems to be panicking and finally getting serious about mask-wearing. Does anywhere else have the "can't be arsed" attitude that seems to be the norm here? I certainly can't think of anywhere.
The British have some of the lowest levels of mask wearing in the world.
I agree there is a major risk the pubs might re-shut. How many people are going to stay 1.5m apart after 6 pints?
Why do we though? I can understand the reluctance in part of the states because it has become politicised. Here we don't seem to be ideologically opposed we just can't seem to be bothered.
Perhaps because UKers have an long, proud tradition of personal freedom that knows no economic, ideological, political, sociological bounds.
Same in US. Yes, GOPers are playing politics, or rather Russian roulette - kinda ironic, eh?
BUT plenty of Democrats, Socialists, whatever are just as irritated by restrictions in a personal way. They just aren't making noise about it. IF Trumpsky & GOP would get off the soapbox, would likely hear more push-back from pointy-headed lefties.
For example, here in Seattle toooo many folks are NOT wearing masks when they should, which is anytime they are within 6 feet of yours truly. Find the best way of grabbing their attention is by accusing them of being Trump supporters - since he's LESS popular than athlete's foot or a bounced check in these parts.
Have a good look at the people not social distancing or wearing a mask in shops in the UK an ask yourself whether than person is upholding the proud tradition of personal freedom or is a selfish arsehole who can't be arsed. 9I know which I think comes closest.
The question for the EU is whether it can acquire the necessary internal political capacity and realism to make serious geopolitical choices in a world ever more fraught with danger where it has become so vulnerable to external shock.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
David Cameron, in the face of stiff recent competition, remains our worst Prime Minister since Lord North. Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister whose stock is most likely to rise when the history books are written. He saved the pound; he saved the union; he saved the world!
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
When the Brexit excrement hits the air conditioning, David Cameron’s reputation will be irretrievably in tatters.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
I would put them on a level pegging, but they are streets ahead of May or Johnson.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
David Cameron, in the face of stiff recent competition, remains our worst Prime Minister since Lord North. Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister whose stock is most likely to rise when the history books are written. He saved the pound; he saved the union; he saved the world!
I'm glad you put the wink there so I knew you were just joking otherwise I'd be worried you were turning delirious.
If this money is available then he could spend it on supporting Britain’s arts sector, in the widest sense, which does more for Britain’s soft power than a repainted plane and a lot of unbuilt bridges, or in supporting those businesses facing ruin because of his government’s mishandling of the epidemic.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
It's a historical site worthy of restoration even if it's not used for a legislature. We wont bulldoze salisbury cathedral because church attendances are decreasing, and these days at least we dont destroy old sites just because they are not used . In fact it is not permitted to let such things run down deliberately
Westminster Hall is a ' historical site worthy of restoration' unquestionably, and there's a lot to be said for the Elizabeth Tower and Big Ben, but the rest is Victorian Gothic and if it's unsafe......
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
When the Brexit excrement hits the air conditioning, David Cameron’s reputation will be irretrievably in tatters.
I genuinely can't understand the logic of Scottish independence supporters who think that UK independence will inevitably result in "excrement".
Either independence is viable and noble or its not. Personally I think it is and support both Brexit and Scottish independence. If you don't think Brexit is viable you should be logically terrified of Scottish independence and a diehard unionist.
At least Scott is consistent in that. He may metaphorically wet the bed at the slightest hint of trouble but at least he's consistent there to give him credit.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
David Cameron, in the face of stiff recent competition, remains our worst Prime Minister since Lord North. Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister whose stock is most likely to rise when the history books are written. He saved the pound; he saved the union; he saved the world!
That only tells me you know nothing about the ineptitude of many of our Prime Ministers since Lord North.
Aberdeen, Portland, Melbourne, Asquith, Chamberlain, the first Duke of Wellington, Bonar Law and above all Lord Goderich were all far worse than Cameron.
That Channel crossing is extremely fragile. Basically UK companies will cut back on exports to avoid it. But they may learn the hard way by turning up at Dover without getting Government authorisation first. Enough lorries doing that will clog the crossing.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
When the Brexit excrement hits the air conditioning, David Cameron’s reputation will be irretrievably in tatters.
I genuinely can't understand the logic of Scottish independence supporters who think that UK independence will inevitably result in "excrement".
Either independence is viable and noble or its not. Personally I think it is and support both Brexit and Scottish independence. If you don't think Brexit is viable you should be logically terrified of Scottish independence and a diehard unionist.
At least Scott is consistent in that. He may metaphorically wet the bed at the slightest hint of trouble but at least he's consistent there to give him credit.
Yeah, it's weird. But Scottish independence is in large part resentment against perceived dominance of England. It's not about independence per se. That's why most ScotNats are happy to hand over control of currency, interest rates, exchange rates, fishing grounds, etc etc to Brussels.
The fact that Arizona,( where the average daily maximum temperature is well over 40 degrees C) is really suffering now shows this.
Wouldn't be 40C in air-conditioned rooms though. Maybe it's the a/c that's the problem.
This is a useful map if you want to plan your retirement or advise children/grandchildren where to invest their futures. Keep to the blue and black bits. The USA looks horrific.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
It's a historical site worthy of restoration even if it's not used for a legislature. We wont bulldoze salisbury cathedral because church attendances are decreasing, and these days at least we dont destroy old sites just because they are not used . In fact it is not permitted to let such things run down deliberately
Westminster Hall is a ' historical site worthy of restoration' unquestionably, and there's a lot to be said for the Elizabeth Tower and Big Ben, but the rest is Victorian Gothic and if it's unsafe......
Hence the need to restore it. And is 19th century not historical anymore? It's a world heritage site, I cannot believe because people hate it they think that means it can just be let to fall down. You arent allowed to neglect an old winter garden under the rules, and if you do they dont let you knock it down under the law.
It simply isnt a solution to the issue of restoration cost to talk about moving parliament- the building would need a lot of work regardless.
So unfair. He's got a lot on his plate at the moment. Is it really reasonable to expect him to read the first letter of a place-name, or to retain more than that?
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
David Cameron, in the face of stiff recent competition, remains our worst Prime Minister since Lord North. Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister whose stock is most likely to rise when the history books are written. He saved the pound; he saved the union; he saved the world!
That only tells me you know nothing about the ineptitude of many of our Prime Ministers since Lord North.
Aberdeen, Portland, Melbourne, Asquith, Chamberlain, the first Duke of Wellington, Bonar Law and above all Lord Goderich were all far worse than Cameron.
Oh - and so was Gordon Brown, of course.
Theresa May was worse than Chamberlain.
Chamberlain is judged harshly and for good reason but wasn't as bad as people make out afterwards.
Yes he naively put more trust than he should in Hitler but he [thanks largely to the efforts of Churchill etc] did ensure the UK was rearmed during that period so that when fighting started we were better prepared than we could have been otherwise.
With a truly bad PM in Chamberlain's place, like Theresa May, we may not just have had war start but actually lost the war.
The fact that Arizona,( where the average daily maximum temperature is well over 40 degrees C) is really suffering now shows this.
Wouldn't be 40C in air-conditioned rooms though. Maybe it's the a/c that's the problem.
This is a useful map if you want to plan your retirement or advise children/grandchildren where to invest their futures. Keep to the blue and black bits. The USA looks horrific.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
I would put them on a level pegging, but they are streets ahead of May or Johnson.
I would have Mrs May back in a heartbeat. Covid-19 could have been her Falklands moment. It won't be Johnson's.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
That's an interesting one, Philip. I'll run it past Mrs PtP when I catch up with her later today.
I'm pretty sure she is ok with *North* American because I've often heard her speak of North American writers, plainly including Canadians. I suspect she equates America with the USA, as I tend to. I wouldn't normally think it included Canada or South America, much less Latin America.
Not sure anybody need be offended by any perceived error. I wouldn't be upset at being called Scottish, Irish, or Welsh. Might be a little bit more problematic the other way around but in my experience the Scots, welsh and Irish shrug off the mistake with good humour whilst correcting it.
Why are people so particular anyway - we're all effing mongrels, aren't we?
We are but our sub conscious brains also work with broad associations and stereotyping. So if we know someone is "Texan" it becomes easier for us to see certain characteristics and harder to spot others. So people will search for and prefer relevant identities that either suit their characteristics or are viewed more neutrally.
This explains why many English people dont like being called Europeans if their values are more local than global, and also why terms for minorities get changed regularly, there is normally an out of date term viewed negatively (that was once a new term viewed neutrally) and a newer term in modern use.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
It's a historical site worthy of restoration even if it's not used for a legislature. We wont bulldoze salisbury cathedral because church attendances are decreasing, and these days at least we dont destroy old sites just because they are not used . In fact it is not permitted to let such things run down deliberately
Westminster Hall is a ' historical site worthy of restoration' unquestionably, and there's a lot to be said for the Elizabeth Tower and Big Ben, but the rest is Victorian Gothic and if it's unsafe......
Hence the need to restore it. And is 19th century not historical anymore? It's a world heritage site, I cannot believe because people hate it they think that means it can just be let to fall down. You arent allowed to neglect an old winter garden under the rules, and if you do they dont let you knock it down under the law.
It simply isnt a solution to the issue of restoration cost to talk about moving parliament- the building would need a lot of work regardless.
They can do what they want with the building but as a Working parliament It can never be fit for purpose. It underpins a lot of what is wrong with UK politics particularly the adversarial nature politics.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
I would put them on a level pegging, but they are streets ahead of May or Johnson.
I would have Mrs May back in a heartbeat. Covid-19 could have been her Falklands moment. It won't be Johnson's.
That's a good pount because some leaders have a strong suit which is particularly relevant to the crises of the times. Churchill and the war is the obvious example. He had a pretty chequered record otherwise. I would personally add Brown and the Banking crisis, though his record apart from that was dismal. It was economics though, and he understood the problems. What's more other leaders recognised it and were happy to follow his lead, notably the newly elected Barack Obama, who was certainly no economist himself.
We'll never know but I suspect May would have been good at Covid. Boris isn't, and as for Trump.....!
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
It's a historical site worthy of restoration even if it's not used for a legislature. We wont bulldoze salisbury cathedral because church attendances are decreasing, and these days at least we dont destroy old sites just because they are not used . In fact it is not permitted to let such things run down deliberately
Westminster Hall is a ' historical site worthy of restoration' unquestionably, and there's a lot to be said for the Elizabeth Tower and Big Ben, but the rest is Victorian Gothic and if it's unsafe......
Hence the need to restore it. And is 19th century not historical anymore? It's a world heritage site, I cannot believe because people hate it they think that means it can just be let to fall down. You arent allowed to neglect an old winter garden under the rules, and if you do they dont let you knock it down under the law.
It simply isnt a solution to the issue of restoration cost to talk about moving parliament- the building would need a lot of work regardless.
They can do what they want with the building but as a Working parliament It can never be fit for purpose. It underpins a lot of what is wrong with UK politics particularly the adversarial nature politics.
Adversarial politics is one of the most important and valuable things we have. It acts against the sorts of cosy consensus politics that lead to the politicians stitching everything up and ignoring the electorate.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
I would put them on a level pegging, but they are streets ahead of May or Johnson.
I would have Mrs May back in a heartbeat. Covid-19 could have been her Falklands moment. It won't be Johnson's.
That's a good pount because some leaders have a strong suit which is particularly relevant to the crises of the times. Churchill and the war is the obvious example. He had a pretty chequered record otherwise. I would personally add Brown and the Banking crisis, though his record apart from that was dismal. It was economics though, and he understood the problems. What's more other leaders recognised it and were happy to follow his lead, notably the newly elected Barack Obama, who was certainly no economist himself.
We'll never know but I suspect May would have been good at Covid. Boris isn't, and as for Trump.....!
Oddly enough I hear people slagging Johnson off and the finishing with ‘but he’s better than Corbyn would have been’ but that remains a hypothesis that can never be tested, for all we know he may have just let the scientists get on with it. Even suggesting he would have done this that and the next thing is pure speculation, we will never know.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
That's an interesting one, Philip. I'll run it past Mrs PtP when I catch up with her later today.
I'm pretty sure she is ok with *North* American because I've often heard her speak of North American writers, plainly including Canadians. I suspect she equates America with the USA, as I tend to. I wouldn't normally think it included Canada or South America, much less Latin America.
Not sure anybody need be offended by any perceived error. I wouldn't be upset at being called Scottish, Irish, or Welsh. Might be a little bit more problematic the other way around but in my experience the Scots, welsh and Irish shrug off the mistake with good humour whilst correcting it.
Why are people so particular anyway - we're all effing mongrels, aren't we?
We are but our sub conscious brains also work with broad associations and stereotyping. So if we know someone is "Texan" it becomes easier for us to see certain characteristics and harder to spot others. So people will search for and prefer relevant identities that either suit their characteristics or are viewed more neutrally.
This explains why many English people dont like being called Europeans if their values are more local than global, and also why terms for minorities get changed regularly, there is normally an out of date term viewed negatively (that was once a new term viewed neutrally) and a newer term in modern use.
I've never met an English person who didn't like being called European. We are European. We can't just invent another continent to be on. For many, it's a less important part of their identity than being British, English, or even Cornish or Yorkshire...ish, but that's quite different to angrily denying the fact.
By the same token, were Scotland ever to leave the UK, every Scot would still be British.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
I would put them on a level pegging, but they are streets ahead of May or Johnson.
I would have Mrs May back in a heartbeat. Covid-19 could have been her Falklands moment. It won't be Johnson's.
That's a good pount because some leaders have a strong suit which is particularly relevant to the crises of the times. Churchill and the war is the obvious example. He had a pretty chequered record otherwise. I would personally add Brown and the Banking crisis, though his record apart from that was dismal. It was economics though, and he understood the problems. What's more other leaders recognised it and were happy to follow his lead, notably the newly elected Barack Obama, who was certainly no economist himself.
We'll never know but I suspect May would have been good at Covid. Boris isn't, and as for Trump.....!
Oddly enough I hear people slagging Johnson off and the finishing with ‘but he’s better than Corbyn would have been’ but that remains a hypothesis that can never be tested, for all we know he may have just let the scientists get on with it. Even suggesting he would have done this that and the next thing is pure speculation, we will never know.
Agreed. I didn't vote for Corbyn but suspect he would have handled the crisis ok.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
For 4 billion quid they should knock the fucking thing down and build a new one somewhere cheap and horrible like Doncaster.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
So now we are down to everyone having to be mystic Meg and be able to magic up which country someone's ancestors came from or even guess they were born in Scunthorpe, what next you address them by their postcode or you are being racist. FFS.
What's race got to do with it?
Like more than a fifth of South Africans my wife is white, I never brought colour into it. The idea that all people from South Africa or Africa in general are black is as bizarre as saying all people in England or the USA are white.
If you wish to refer to nationality refer to nationality. If you wish to refer to ethnicity then refer to ethnicity. The problem with vaguely calling people "African" is that refers to neither nationality nor ethnicity.
Nobody said you did but HTF do you know what country anyone comes from , white, black , brown, yellow or whatever unless they have a big sign round their neck. Why the F**k would someone assume your wife was /call her an African, not exactly how you open up a conversation. I don't walk up to black people and say hoi are you African or were you born in Scunthorpe. Most fxukwitted topic I have seen yet.
Entering a culture war is always losing ground, so don't even have the debate. Those challenges can be dealt with after winning an election. Blair did more for LGBTQ+ people than any other PM this century - and he did it without getting into a culture war in the first place.
To put it politely, bollocks. The repeal of section 28 and the introduction of civil partnerships were massive culture wars. You don't remember them as culture wars as they were won, and they were won because Labour had the courage to fight them.
The homophobia unleashed by the move to repeal section 28 (clause 2a) in Scotland was horrendous. And the courage of the Lab politicians to stand up to it was commendable.
Certainly cannot think of anything else commendable they ever did for Scotland.
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
When the Brexit excrement hits the air conditioning, David Cameron’s reputation will be irretrievably in tatters.
I genuinely can't understand the logic of Scottish independence supporters who think that UK independence will inevitably result in "excrement".
Either independence is viable and noble or its not. Personally I think it is and support both Brexit and Scottish independence. If you don't think Brexit is viable you should be logically terrified of Scottish independence and a diehard unionist.
At least Scott is consistent in that. He may metaphorically wet the bed at the slightest hint of trouble but at least he's consistent there to give him credit.
Here is a hint , the majority of people in Scotland wish to be in the EU, whilst being independent and not a colony of England.
Entering a culture war is always losing ground, so don't even have the debate. Those challenges can be dealt with after winning an election. Blair did more for LGBTQ+ people than any other PM this century - and he did it without getting into a culture war in the first place.
To put it politely, bollocks. The repeal of section 28 and the introduction of civil partnerships were massive culture wars. You don't remember them as culture wars as they were won, and they were won because Labour had the courage to fight them.
The homophobia unleashed by the move to repeal section 28 (clause 2a) in Scotland was horrendous. And the courage of the Lab politicians to stand up to it was commendable.
Certainly cannot think of anything else commendable they ever did for Scotland.
Entering a culture war is always losing ground, so don't even have the debate. Those challenges can be dealt with after winning an election. Blair did more for LGBTQ+ people than any other PM this century - and he did it without getting into a culture war in the first place.
To put it politely, bollocks. The repeal of section 28 and the introduction of civil partnerships were massive culture wars. You don't remember them as culture wars as they were won, and they were won because Labour had the courage to fight them.
The homophobia unleashed by the move to repeal section 28 (clause 2a) in Scotland was horrendous. And the courage of the Lab politicians to stand up to it was commendable.
Certainly cannot think of anything else commendable they ever did for Scotland.
The Scottish Parliament?
They built that carbuncle at huge cost forsure and also tried to ensure we never got independence
Brown... Cameron .... May .... Johnson. It's a modern day Decline and Fall.
Back at the time, who would have ever dreamt that history would hold Gordon Brown in higher regard than David Cameron? If you peruse the PB threads of that era, the near-unanimous judgement was the exact opposite.
It won't.
David Cameron, in the face of stiff recent competition, remains our worst Prime Minister since Lord North. Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister whose stock is most likely to rise when the history books are written. He saved the pound; he saved the union; he saved the world!
I'm glad you put the wink there so I knew you were just joking otherwise I'd be worried you were turning delirious.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
It's a historical site worthy of restoration even if it's not used for a legislature. We wont bulldoze salisbury cathedral because church attendances are decreasing, and these days at least we dont destroy old sites just because they are not used . In fact it is not permitted to let such things run down deliberately
Westminster Hall is a ' historical site worthy of restoration' unquestionably, and there's a lot to be said for the Elizabeth Tower and Big Ben, but the rest is Victorian Gothic and if it's unsafe......
Hence the need to restore it. And is 19th century not historical anymore? It's a world heritage site, I cannot believe because people hate it they think that means it can just be let to fall down. You arent allowed to neglect an old winter garden under the rules, and if you do they dont let you knock it down under the law.
It simply isnt a solution to the issue of restoration cost to talk about moving parliament- the building would need a lot of work regardless.
They can do what they want with the building but as a Working parliament It can never be fit for purpose. It underpins a lot of what is wrong with UK politics particularly the adversarial nature politics.
Adversarial politics is one of the most important and valuable things we have. It acts against the sorts of cosy consensus politics that lead to the politicians stitching everything up and ignoring the electorate.
You are confusing it with a working electoral system that allows for multiple views to be mediated, instead of tossing absolute power to whichever corrupt cabal conjures up a plurality.
Latest data: Overall England seems to be steadily reducing reported cases (R=0.69) at a low level (3 cases per day per million) Cases in London are now increasing (R=1.53) though from a low level (3 cases per day per million). However the incidence of cases varies widely across the 33 boroughs. There are seven hotspots: Brent Ealing Hammersmith Hounslow Kensington and Chelsea Waltham Forest Westminster
Hammersmith for instance I calculate has an R of 3.3 and an incidence of 12 cases per day per million. (NB Small numbers so R can be erratic)
For comparison, I calculate that Leicester has an R of 0.90 (+0.03) i.e. slowly declining but from a very high daily incidence of 17 cases per million.
If a tightening of regulations is needed in London, I reckon it will be by borough. It would be unmanagable and unnecessary to restrict the whole of London.
Comments
Parliament is a worldwide icon for the UK. A tourist hotspot. Flash up an image of the Houses of Parliament in the USA and people will instantly identify it with London.
Knocking it down would be like the Parisians knocking down the Eiffel Tower.
Refurbish it and open it to tourists and you'd easily make back £4 billion in tourist revenue within a few years.
"There is currently little concrete evidence that Covid-19 is a seasonal illness."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/second-wave-unhelpful-concept-top-infectious-disease-expert/
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/weekending19june2020
Week 13 - 1,011
Week 14 - 6,082
Week 15 - 7,996
Week 16 - 11,854
Week 17 - 11,539
Week 18 - 8,012
Week 19 - 3,081
Week 20 - 4,385
Week 21 - 2,348
Week 22 - 1,653
Week 23 - 732
Week 24 - 559
Week 25 - -65
All these comparisons with Churchill and Roosevelt are almost reaching Trumpian levels of delusion. The reality is much starker...
JB - Jack Bauer, James Bond, Jason Bourne (Successful agents)
JC - Jeremy Corbyn, Jesus Christ (Unpopular socialists)
BJ - Boris Johnson, Blow Job .......
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8473931/Sky-Sports-pundit-Matt-Le-Tissier-says-review-wearing-Black-Lives-Matter-badge.html
The question for the EU is whether it can acquire the necessary internal political capacity and realism to make serious geopolitical choices in a world ever more fraught with danger where it has become so vulnerable to external shock.
https://engelsbergideas.com/essays/geopolitics-of-a-pandemic/
https://www.unesco.org.uk/world-heritage-sites/
Either independence is viable and noble or its not. Personally I think it is and support both Brexit and Scottish independence. If you don't think Brexit is viable you should be logically terrified of Scottish independence and a diehard unionist.
At least Scott is consistent in that. He may metaphorically wet the bed at the slightest hint of trouble but at least he's consistent there to give him credit.
Aberdeen, Portland, Melbourne, Asquith, Chamberlain, the first Duke of Wellington, Bonar Law and above all Lord Goderich were all far worse than Cameron.
Oh - and so was Gordon Brown, of course.
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/ng-interactive/2018/aug/14/which-cities-are-liveable-without-air-conditioning-and-for-how-much-longer
It simply isnt a solution to the issue of restoration cost to talk about moving parliament- the building would need a lot of work regardless.
Chamberlain is judged harshly and for good reason but wasn't as bad as people make out afterwards.
Yes he naively put more trust than he should in Hitler but he [thanks largely to the efforts of Churchill etc] did ensure the UK was rearmed during that period so that when fighting started we were better prepared than we could have been otherwise.
With a truly bad PM in Chamberlain's place, like Theresa May, we may not just have had war start but actually lost the war.
If I move again it will probably be to Pembrokeshire. Looks safe enough.
So perhaps the government should be ferrying COVID-19 patients round care homes so that they can cough on the residents.
This explains why many English people dont like being called Europeans if their values are more local than global, and also why terms for minorities get changed regularly, there is normally an out of date term viewed negatively (that was once a new term viewed neutrally) and a newer term in modern use.
https://twitter.com/NewStatesman/status/1277889665127845889?s=20
We'll never know but I suspect May would have been good at Covid. Boris isn't, and as for Trump.....!
No possible rationale for locking people up and taking away their liberties now that NHS capacity is underutilised again.
Maybe no case even for masks ... there may have been a case for them in February/March/April but that has long passed.
By the same token, were Scotland ever to leave the UK, every Scot would still be British.
There is nothing ideological about a virus.
But the best we've had in more than 40 years.
Overall England seems to be steadily reducing reported cases (R=0.69) at a low level (3 cases per day per million)
Cases in London are now increasing (R=1.53) though from a low level (3 cases per day per million).
However the incidence of cases varies widely across the 33 boroughs.
There are seven hotspots:
Brent
Ealing
Hammersmith
Hounslow
Kensington and Chelsea
Waltham Forest
Westminster
Hammersmith for instance I calculate has an R of 3.3 and an incidence of 12 cases per day per million. (NB Small numbers so R can be erratic)
For comparison, I calculate that Leicester has an R of 0.90 (+0.03) i.e. slowly declining but from a very high daily incidence of 17 cases per million.
If a tightening of regulations is needed in London, I reckon it will be by borough. It would be unmanagable and unnecessary to restrict the whole of London.