All this chat about performance reviews and working from home versus in the office is serving to remind me what a great decision I made three years ago to retire early!
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
The empire was almost certainly toast before that. Singapore was just the disaster which made it obvious.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
I suppose it depends on your definition of "superpower".
Britain has never been the dominant European military power on land but as a maritime power it enjoyed a long period of ascendency.
Yet, after Yorktown, wars were won with allies, The Napoleonic Wars weren't won by Britain alone though British money and influence supported the various coalitions and arguably Prussia, Russia and Austria played a not insignificant role.
Both World Wars were won as part of alliances yet even in 1945 we still had a seat at the top table and soon after we had a Bomb keeping us there. However, if you define power as freedom to take action unilaterally, we lost that some time ago and both India and Suez were the recognition we were a bankrupt superpower.
It was the experience of Suez that convinced Macmillan Britain's destiny lay in closer economic ties with Europe which set us on the road which ended in 2016 with us voting to leave the EU.
In a sense, we are back to that question which was never resolved after 1945 - what is or should be Britain's place in the world? We have many advantages but no one suggests we are going to "go it alone" nor can we realistically claim to be comparable to the US and China and IF the last named are the global superpowers for the mid to late 21st Century, the Pacific, rather than the Atlantic, will be the focus of interest and for the first time in more than a thousand years, Europe won't be the centre of the world.
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
No, as India never fell to Japan and had a far bigger population and a bigger economy than all those areas you mentioned combined.
Australia never was relevant to our superpower status
Cummings ruled out as thinks its wrong for him to earn over 100k for some reason. How about his deputy, one Boris Johnson?
This will end badly methinks.
A great deal of day to day politics will now be focused on these TV events.
But I can't see how any future PM will be able to undo it.
Of course they could. New PM swept into No 10 on a big majority, or even on a large vote of his or her party, could simply say "we're not doing that anymore". What or who could stop them?
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
If Napoleon had conquered Ireland, we'd probably have been defeated.
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
It's not about the utility or value of the territory: John Bull failed to keep control of his other island. The Empire was doomed from that moment on.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
I suppose it depends on your definition of "superpower".
Britain has never been the dominant European military power on land but as a maritime power it enjoyed a long period of ascendency.
Yet, after Yorktown, wars were won with allies, The Napoleonic Wars weren't won by Britain alone though British money and influence supported the various coalitions and arguably Prussia, Russia and Austria played a not insignificant role.
Both World Wars were won as part of alliances yet even in 1945 we still had a seat at the top table and soon after we had a Bomb keeping us there. However, if you define power as freedom to take action unilaterally, we lost that some time ago and both India and Suez were the recognition we were a bankrupt superpower.
It was the experience of Suez that convinced Macmillan Britain's destiny lay in closer economic ties with Europe which set us on the road which ended in 2016 with us voting to leave the EU.
In a sense, we are back to that question which was never resolved after 1945 - what is or should be Britain's place in the world? We have many advantages but no one suggests we are going to "go it alone" nor can we realistically claim to be comparable to the US and China and IF the last named are the global superpowers for the mid to late 21st Century, the Pacific, rather than the Atlantic, will be the focus of interest and for the first time in more than a thousand years, Europe won't be the centre of the world.
Indian independence ended British superpower status, Suez just confirmed it.
Europe was not really the centre of global economic and political and military power until the 16th century
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
If Napoleon had conquered Ireland, we'd probably have been defeated.
Cummings ruled out as thinks its wrong for him to earn over 100k for some reason. How about his deputy, one Boris Johnson?
This will end badly methinks.
A great deal of day to day politics will now be focused on these TV events.
But I can't see how any future PM will be able to undo it.
Those who wanted an end to Brussels unelected bureaucrats will be delighted that not only is the bureaucrat Cummings the decision maker for the government but that the decisions will now be presented by another unelected bureaucrat rather than the PM and his cabinet in parliament.
Meanwhile, on Betfair, Susan Rice is into 3 (or 2/1) and challenging for favouritism, and is Gretchen Whitmer being nibbled back into 30 (still an outsider)?
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
If Napoleon had conquered Ireland, we'd probably have been defeated.
No as there is something called the Irish Sea and after Trafalgar the Royal Navy still remained supreme
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Yes, I accept that is true. While the Empire increased in size post WW1, the financial situation was dire. At that time though America was looking inward, and other European countries down on their luck too.
Britain as a world power ended after Singapore though. The writing was on the wall.
It is easy to spot the hypocrisy of the USA founding fathers, but our hypocrisy fighting a war against tyranny with an undemocratic empire based on racial superiority, and well within living memory, is pretty stark too.
Veep betting!! Rice drops to 3.25. I think her lowest yet.
Is that a value lay? Seems plausible enough and close enough to decision day that Im reluctant to take her on even at the short price but might be being overly frit.
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
It's not about the utility or value of the territory: John Bull failed to keep control of his other island. The Empire was doomed from that moment on.
Yes it is, we could never have set foot in Ireland and still have been a superpower thanks to India and earlier the American colonies
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
If Napoleon had conquered Ireland, we'd probably have been defeated.
No as there is something called the Irish Sea and after Trafalgar the Royal Navy still remained supreme
Veep betting!! Rice drops to 3.25. I think her lowest yet.
Is that a value lay? Seems plausible enough and close enough to decision day that Im reluctant to take her on even at the short price but might be being overly frit.
You may want to wait a little bit. Still dropping.
And thanks for answering the performance review question, the fact it's structured on a 6 monthly basis tells me that your company isn't one for communication. Ideally you want these things done fortnightly or even weekly (heck it would only take 5 minutes as part of a catch up session) as it ensures issues are dealt with quickly and nothing is a surprise...
That doesn't sound like a performance review, just a 1-1. A performance review is a more formal and comprehensive process involving feedback from multiple sources.
Surely feedback should be continual, if you are at the point that you need to sit down and formalise it you are heading rapidly towards performance review or a nasty surprise for either management or the employee.
I can assure you the companies you cited use a process like I'm describing. Continual feedback is valuable but it doesn't replace a structured process for performance review.
Formal performance reviews are counter productive. Far better to give continual feedback and support. The formal reviews can lead to games playing, resentment, and time wasting. Neither managers nor subordinates like them. I agree many companies continue to use them. It is the power of the HR department. Scrap them. I did.
I’m going to apply for this. Mind you it’s a tough job market at the moment. The last two jobs I applied for I didn’t even get short listed.
One was for the position of Chief Officer at British Transport Police. In my application I stressed the fact that I am British, I love trains and I value the Police - but no luck with that one. They insisted that they wanted a police person. But they said they are going to keep my details on file!
The other job was to be the Cabinet Secretary to Her Majesty’s Government. (With no requirement to advise on National Security - so probably easy enough). Well, I thought why not? I haven’t done any secretarial work before but I said that I know perfectly well what a Kitchen Cabinet is and I have a set of Long Knives that can be deployed, whenever needed. Again no joy. They wanted someone with more relevant experience.
I suspect the real reason why I was unsuccessful was that, perhaps unwisely, I alluded to the fact that I like to have a lie in most mornings and that I also need to be able to nip off to watch key National Hunt races, often at short notice. I may need to be more circumspect in applying for the next job. Wish me luck!
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
No, as India never fell to Japan and had a far bigger population and a bigger economy than all those areas you mentioned combined.
Australia never was relevant to our superpower status
After Singapore fell, and we retreated from Burma, and permitted the Bengal famine, Britain could not hold onto India. Between Gandhis "Quit India" campaign and Bose's Indian National Army, the Empire in India had lost all credibility.
The reason why working from home is unlikely to remain as widespread as people think is that those who work remotely are likely to get sidelined and overlooked for promotion, and are most likely to get made redundant if there's a need to reduce headcount. It's also, as others have said, very difficult for training up new staff, and for motivating teams. It's great working from home if you have a report to write, or you're developing a new software module, but that's been the case for a long time. I don't think we'll see a huge change from the pre-Covid-19 position, just some increased flexibility.
It will be very role specific. If I think of our business, sales people are going to be working in offices because they sell more if they are together, sharing info, competing etc. Content-generation and marketing can be done very effectively from home, and will only need the odd meeting in the office. Developers and designers will have to be in now and again, but not all the time. The events team, well ... we have pivoted to online events: they generate a lot less revenue, but far higher margins, than physical events; and they need far fewer people working on them and it can all be done from home.
Developers work well in a team, it would be suicide to compartmentalise them as well as separate them from each other. Honestly, the death of the office is massively overstated IMO.
Most developers I know use a pair of headphones to drown out office noise - they really don't need the distractions of an office. The ideal solution is silence to allow them to concentrate on the problem they are currently thinking through.
But hey what do I know I've merely been one for 30 odd years...
Edit to add - this is the reason why daily stand-ups work so well - it provides a daily point at which issues can be identified and anyone having problems can put they hand up and ask for help.
Precisely and with screen sharing and video standups nothing is lost. I did a training session for other developers on the team just last week on a system they didn't know too well with absolutely no issues using nothing more than teams and screen sharing.
I also am probably 50% to 100% more productive without the distractions of an open plan office.
I fear most companies are though going to go for a half way house, that is to say 3 days wfh 2 days in the office. To me this just means you are cutting my productivity for 2 days for no real reason unless you insist on all the team being in the same 2 days. It also cuts some of the major benefits to me of home working in that I am still tied down to the area my office is in. I can't move to an area where I could actually afford to buy a house, nor can I move to be closer to family. A family I have had little contact, a week or two a year from my holiday and phone calls etc, with since I left college because I had to move to the london area to find work from the south west.
No brainer for you clearly.
But what about the many people who are very different personalities at work than they are at home?
Some potentially difficult challenges there.
I am not saying people can't be office based if they like. The difference is those that want to be office based seem to think the rest of us should come in else what is the point of them being there and they will get lonely
I think you are deliberately misunderstanding what others are saying to exaggerate your own point.
On this thread Ive probably been the poster most saying that wfh is not as simple as continuing the lockdown period. However I am agreeing that the trend is that way, just that it wont be as quick or as decisive as a forum dominated by middle aged geeks (myself included) is going to think.
Not everyone works in an analytical role where concentration is vital, not everyone has an hour commute to a nice rural or suburban home.
People new to the workplace will be at a huge disadvantage working from home, the best graduates will want to learn from our experience, and it is easier to do that in the same room.
Do businesses want to focus on getting those in the door, or on making the most out of existing staff. The answer will vary significantly for businesses.
We also dont know what happens to office costs, if they go back to 2008 levels for instance that would be about a 70% saving for our business, at which point its not particularly expensive to have an office.
Good businesses are also often communities not just a set of tasks that need to be done. The future will be varied with more working from home but it will be an evolution accelerated by covid, not a revolution where expecting people to turn up to a physical office for work becomes taboo.
I am not misunderstanding anything I am giving my point of view as a worker. One that has been separated from his family for 30 odd years by...you must be in the office when I have never had a need to be in the offfice and work better at home,
The only reason I have had to be office based is managers who are too scared they will be shown up as superfluous as a lot are now in the covid era
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
Churchill did NOT agree - he wanted to invade (Southern) Ireland, and was quite willing to let the Japanese conquer most or all of Australia.
Both as short-term measures, of course - but show how much he prioritized defense of Great Britain, and how little defense of Australia.
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Yes, I accept that is true. While the Empire increased in size post WW1, the financial situation was dire. At that time though America was looking inward, and other European countries down on their luck too.
Britain as a world power ended after Singapore though. The writing was on the wall.
It is easy to spot the hypocrisy of the USA founding fathers, but our hypocrisy fighting a war against tyranny with an undemocratic empire based on racial superiority, and well within living memory, is pretty stark too.
It was the experience of Suez that convinced Macmillan Britain's destiny lay in closer economic ties with Europe which set us on the road which ended in 2016 with us voting to leave the EU.
Didn't it also make Britain become much more closely aligned with the US? That's not a contradiction as the US has always supported UK membership of the EU (and it's predecessors).
And thanks for answering the performance review question, the fact it's structured on a 6 monthly basis tells me that your company isn't one for communication. Ideally you want these things done fortnightly or even weekly (heck it would only take 5 minutes as part of a catch up session) as it ensures issues are dealt with quickly and nothing is a surprise...
That doesn't sound like a performance review, just a 1-1. A performance review is a more formal and comprehensive process involving feedback from multiple sources.
Surely feedback should be continual, if you are at the point that you need to sit down and formalise it you are heading rapidly towards performance review or a nasty surprise for either management or the employee.
I can assure you the companies you cited use a process like I'm describing. Continual feedback is valuable but it doesn't replace a structured process for performance review.
Checks with 3 of those companies, nope, nope and nope....
It was the experience of Suez that convinced Macmillan Britain's destiny lay in closer economic ties with Europe which set us on the road which ended in 2016 with us voting to leave the EU.
Didn't it also make Britain become much more closely aligned with the US? That's not a contradiction as the US has always supported UK membership of the EU (and it's predecessors).
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
Churchill did NOT agree - he wanted to invade (Southern) Ireland, and was quite willing to let the Japanese conquer most or all of Australia.
Both as short-term measures, of course - but show how much he prioritized defense of Great Britain, and how little defense of Australia.
Ireland might have been nice to have but was irrelevant to our superpower status as indeed was Australia, we only became a superpower because of 2 colonies, those in America and then those in India
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
No, as India never fell to Japan and had a far bigger population and a bigger economy than all those areas you mentioned combined.
Australia never was relevant to our superpower status
India was never going to remain part of the empire, whatever happened during WWII.
The reason why working from home is unlikely to remain as widespread as people think is that those who work remotely are likely to get sidelined and overlooked for promotion, and are most likely to get made redundant if there's a need to reduce headcount. It's also, as others have said, very difficult for training up new staff, and for motivating teams. It's great working from home if you have a report to write, or you're developing a new software module, but that's been the case for a long time. I don't think we'll see a huge change from the pre-Covid-19 position, just some increased flexibility.
It will be very role specific. If I think of our business, sales people are going to be working in offices because they sell more if they are together, sharing info, competing etc. Content-generation and marketing can be done very effectively from home, and will only need the odd meeting in the office. Developers and designers will have to be in now and again, but not all the time. The events team, well ... we have pivoted to online events: they generate a lot less revenue, but far higher margins, than physical events; and they need far fewer people working on them and it can all be done from home.
Developers work well in a team, it would be suicide to compartmentalise them as well as separate them from each other. Honestly, the death of the office is massively overstated IMO.
Most developers I know use a pair of headphones to drown out office noise - they really don't need the distractions of an office. The ideal solution is silence to allow them to concentrate on the problem they are currently thinking through.
But hey what do I know I've merely been one for 30 odd years...
Edit to add - this is the reason why daily stand-ups work so well - it provides a daily point at which issues can be identified and anyone having problems can put they hand up and ask for help.
Precisely and with screen sharing and video standups nothing is lost. I did a training session for other developers on the team just last week on a system they didn't know too well with absolutely no issues using nothing more than teams and screen sharing.
I also am probably 50% to 100% more productive without the distractions of an open plan office.
I fear most companies are though going to go for a half way house, that is to say 3 days wfh 2 days in the office. To me this just means you are cutting my productivity for 2 days for no real reason unless you insist on all the team being in the same 2 days. It also cuts some of the major benefits to me of home working in that I am still tied down to the area my office is in. I can't move to an area where I could actually afford to buy a house, nor can I move to be closer to family. A family I have had little contact, a week or two a year from my holiday and phone calls etc, with since I left college because I had to move to the london area to find work from the south west.
No brainer for you clearly.
But what about the many people who are very different personalities at work than they are at home?
Some potentially difficult challenges there.
I am not saying people can't be office based if they like. The difference is those that want to be office based seem to think the rest of us should come in else what is the point of them being there and they will get lonely
I think you are deliberately misunderstanding what others are saying to exaggerate your own point.
On this thread Ive probably been the poster most saying that wfh is not as simple as continuing the lockdown period. However I am agreeing that the trend is that way, just that it wont be as quick or as decisive as a forum dominated by middle aged geeks (myself included) is going to think.
Not everyone works in an analytical role where concentration is vital, not everyone has an hour commute to a nice rural or suburban home.
People new to the workplace will be at a huge disadvantage working from home, the best graduates will want to learn from our experience, and it is easier to do that in the same room.
Do businesses want to focus on getting those in the door, or on making the most out of existing staff. The answer will vary significantly for businesses.
We also dont know what happens to office costs, if they go back to 2008 levels for instance that would be about a 70% saving for our business, at which point its not particularly expensive to have an office.
Good businesses are also often communities not just a set of tasks that need to be done. The future will be varied with more working from home but it will be an evolution accelerated by covid, not a revolution where expecting people to turn up to a physical office for work becomes taboo.
As I said before I don't think learning by osmosis is the best approach but that is what you seem to think people should do.
What actually needs to be done is to formalise within contracts that it is the responsibility of all senior staff to support, train and advice more junior staff and ensure that is contained within whatever performance targets and tracking are used.
BTW how often does your company do performance reviews?
Formally and documented every six months, in practice its more important that it is as and when needed for newer staff or where there are issues but thats less formal. As for learning by osmosis surely it depends what skills and knowledge you are looking to learn? If you are a young accountant seeking to understand how the IT dept or sales dept works, (which might be only a peripheral part of their role so never taught formally) talking to their peers and managers in those depts is very effective. If its a deep technical skill then of course its different.
So what is stopping them from picking up the phone and asking or using email to organise a meeting with someone in that department - most people love to talk about what they do.
The only thing the new world requires is to ensure people are better at communicating what is going on... And that is going to take time as while I can cover how MS (Consulting), Google, Stripe or even Buffer manage wholly remote workforces it requires a wholly different way of working but massive productivity gains if done correctly.
And thanks for answering the performance review question, the fact it's structured on a 6 monthly basis tells me that your company isn't one for communication. Ideally you want these things done fortnightly or even weekly (heck it would only take 5 minutes as part of a catch up session) as it ensures issues are dealt with quickly and nothing is a surprise...
There is no way you want a formal and documented review process every week.
I talk to all my team individually every week, at least. We have team meetings 3 times a week. Feedback is given immediately. But we only have a formal and documented review process every 6 months.
For non manager level staff a formal review every six months = this is where we come up with reasons why we wont give you a payrise this year. Poor performance shouldn't need to wait for a 6 month review it should be dealt with at the time
Best I had was well we are marking you down on safety because you had a car accidend....yes I did I was a passenger in a car where a lorry decided to occupy the same space because it was continental and opposite drive....but was the difference between getting a pay rise and not that year
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
We were never a ‘superpower’, merely the strongest of the great powers for a time. The term really had no meaning until after WWII.
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
We were never a ‘superpower’, merely the strongest of the great powers for a time. The term really had no meaning until after WWII.
Of course it did ie domination of a large proportion of the globe or domination of the global economy made you a superpower.
The Roman Empire, the Mongol Empire, the Spanish Empire and the British Empire were all superpowers before the USSR and USA came along. China was also arguably a superpower before too under the Qing dynasty
It's like four weeks ago when we thought there wouldn't be a statue left standing in the country by now.
Yes, who could possibly have foreseen that that was overblown, hysterical nonsense?
I didn't know because I had no yardstick to judge how seriously to take BLM. It turns out they are more "Yeah black lives are really really important, sure, but it's vital to keep a sense of perspective."
Maybe the people on the protests think it's job done now!
Wasnt on the protests but think its job done "for" now rather than job done. Those open to change have listened and understood, those resistant arent ready for change at the moment.
Yes. Frank reappraisal of Empire was never going to be the work of a single wet Wednesday afternoon.
The historians will have a lot of work to do rewriting their books now HYUFD has discovered that Britain was in fact the main Western superpower until near the end of the Cold War.
I said until the independence of India and I also said superpower not the only one
Britain stopped being a super-power the day Singapore fell. Or rather a few weeks before, when Japanese sunk HMS Prince of Wales & HMS Repulse.
OR you could stay the end was mid-WWII, when Britain became dependent upon US credit to stay afloat fiscally.
Yes, I think the fall of Singapore, with the similar surrender of Hong Kong and retreat from Burma represented Britain's collapse of Empire. Particularly so because the defeats were so abject a d also defeat was at the hands of a non European power.
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
Arguably the end was the Anglo-Irish Treaty. Britain had shown itself to be incapable of maintaining a hold on its oldest colony, which indeed was legally not a colony part of the metropolis itself. Yes, the UK was able to maintain the fiction, for a few years, that Ireland was still part of "His Majesty's dominions" but the reality was that British power was no longer invincible.
Ireland was even less relevant to our superpower status than Australia
Churchill did NOT agree - he wanted to invade (Southern) Ireland, and was quite willing to let the Japanese conquer most or all of Australia.
Both as short-term measures, of course - but show how much he prioritized defense of Great Britain, and how little defense of Australia.
I presume the desire to invade Ireland was the same as that which drove the invasion of Iceland and the attempted invasion of Norway - protection of the Atlantic routes.
I agree, during the 1920s and 30s the USA was largely demilitarised and isolationist. .
Not in naval terms - it maintained a large and effective fleet between the wars, even if it was hampered by being split betweent two oceans.
It was only the Washington Treaty* that stopped the US from building a Two Ocean navy that would have been bigger than the RN and the Japanese Navy. Combined.
*well that and the Depression.
We should have let them, as Churchill later said, rather than trying to limit them.
"Build what you want - you don't figure in our plans at all, except as a potential friend".
Except: "War Plan Red was one of the color-coded war plans created by the United States War Department in the late 1920s and the early 1930s to estimate the requirements for a hypothetical war with the United Kingdom (the "Red" forces)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red
I don't think the US actually expected to use it ever. Planning is what general staffs do. Probably there's still some sort of outline in the basement of the Pentagon for the general problem of "how would we conquer Canada if the President decides maple syrup is too expensive". Probably the MoD has a plan to invade France somewhere too.
You can't possibly know that. US policy (perhaps understandably) toward Britain since the inception of the country has been ambivalent at best. Their participation in both world wars was belated and it was by no means certain which side they would join. Even in the modern era being their best buddy ever hasn't stopped them shaking down BP and Standard Chartered.
You must be chugging EverClear IF you truly believe that USA joining with Germany in either WWI or WWII was EVER a realistic prospect.
Germany certainly realized there was ZERO chance of USA aligning self with either Kaiser's or Hitler's Reich. Only question was, would US actually go to war with Germany. Which of course we did, mostly as a result of German miscalculation.
Thinking about it, the Ukraine was probably in the worst position in World War II as a nation. Absolubtely screwed any and every which way. Poland too.
I believe Belorussia (in the same vicinity) suffered proportionally the most of all nations in WWII.
Belarus has the current longest-serving Government-in-Exile.
Why would anybody even want to go to a foreign country on "holiday" anyway, when lots of the usual places like museums and galleries aren't open because of the pandemic?
On the contrary museums are mostly open, and now is a fantastic time to visit them (if you are happy with the Covid risk) as they are crowd-free.
Comments
Not only was this a collapse of the racial, and military "superiority" of the British Empire, but the subsequent rift with Australia turned it towards America. The Empire was toast after that.
A great deal of day to day politics will now be focused on these TV events.
But I can't see how any future PM will be able to undo it.
Britain has never been the dominant European military power on land but as a maritime power it enjoyed a long period of ascendency.
Yet, after Yorktown, wars were won with allies, The Napoleonic Wars weren't won by Britain alone though British money and influence supported the various coalitions and arguably Prussia, Russia and Austria played a not insignificant role.
Both World Wars were won as part of alliances yet even in 1945 we still had a seat at the top table and soon after we had a Bomb keeping us there. However, if you define power as freedom to take action unilaterally, we lost that some time ago and both India and Suez were the recognition we were a bankrupt superpower.
It was the experience of Suez that convinced Macmillan Britain's destiny lay in closer economic ties with Europe which set us on the road which ended in 2016 with us voting to leave the EU.
In a sense, we are back to that question which was never resolved after 1945 - what is or should be Britain's place in the world? We have many advantages but no one suggests we are going to "go it alone" nor can we realistically claim to be comparable to the US and China and IF the last named are the global superpowers for the mid to late 21st Century, the Pacific, rather than the Atlantic, will be the focus of interest and for the first time in more than a thousand years, Europe won't be the centre of the world.
Australia never was relevant to our superpower status
Europe was not really the centre of global economic and political and military power until the 16th century
Meanwhile, on Betfair, Susan Rice is into 3 (or 2/1) and challenging for favouritism, and is Gretchen Whitmer being nibbled back into 30 (still an outsider)?
Kamala Harris: 2.9
Susan Rice: 3
Karen Bass: 9.8
Tammy Duckworth: 11.5
Elizabeth Warren: 15.5
Val Demings: 17
Gretchen Whitmer: 30
Michelle Obama: 46
Hillary Clinton: 90
Stacey Abrams: 90
Keisha Lance Bottoms: 120
Michelle Lujan Grisham: 140
Britain as a world power ended after Singapore though. The writing was on the wall.
I was musing on this Tweet the other day:
https://twitter.com/arlenparsa/status/1168199200183586816?s=09
It is easy to spot the hypocrisy of the USA founding fathers, but our hypocrisy fighting a war against tyranny with an undemocratic empire based on racial superiority, and well within living memory, is pretty stark too.
One was for the position of Chief Officer at British Transport Police. In my application I stressed the fact that I am British, I love trains and I value the Police - but no luck with that one. They insisted that they wanted a police person. But they said they are going to keep my details on file!
The other job was to be the Cabinet Secretary to Her Majesty’s Government. (With no requirement to advise on National Security - so probably easy enough). Well, I thought why not? I haven’t done any secretarial work before but I said that I know perfectly well what a Kitchen Cabinet is and I have a set of Long Knives that can be deployed, whenever needed. Again no joy. They wanted someone with more relevant experience.
I suspect the real reason why I was unsuccessful was that, perhaps unwisely, I alluded to the fact that I like to have a lie in most mornings and that I also need to be able to nip off to watch key National Hunt races, often at short notice. I may need to be more circumspect in applying for the next job. Wish me luck!
The only reason I have had to be office based is managers who are too scared they will be shown up as superfluous as a lot are now in the covid era
Both as short-term measures, of course - but show how much he prioritized defense of Great Britain, and how little defense of Australia.
Best I had was well we are marking you down on safety because you had a car accidend....yes I did I was a passenger in a car where a lorry decided to occupy the same space because it was continental and opposite drive....but was the difference between getting a pay rise and not that year
The term really had no meaning until after WWII.
The Roman Empire, the Mongol Empire, the Spanish Empire and the British Empire were all superpowers before the USSR and USA came along. China was also arguably a superpower before too under the Qing dynasty
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/07/28/when_federal_troops_swept_away_the_bonus_army_143819.html