It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
True in many respects. My impression is that Afrikaners, however, are MUCH more likely to learn other languages (English & African) and have some appreciation for other cultures, largely by being a minority in their own country, even when they temporarily held the whip hand (in more ways than one).
Of all the candidates Tammy Duckworth seems to have by far the best "story" to tell - and would surely be a hard person to attack as unAmerican given her service. Not that it stopped them "swiftboating" John Kerry.
However I guess she is the "wrong type" of minority.
Wrong type for whom? Tammy Duckworth has long been third or fourth in the betting and is (or possibly was) on Biden's shortlist for background checks (that ended last week).
It would go down like a lead balloon with the black community after all the virtue signalling that the VP should be black.
But tbh that's not the biggest issue with Tammy, as a personality I suspect she'll be very marmite-y.
Among Black chattering classes, maybe. Among Black voters in general, not as big a deal as many seem to think.
Note just how well Kamala Harris & Cory Booker did with African American voters in South Carolina & elsewhere. Or rather, did NOT.
One reason for touting Harris, Rice, Bass, etc is to show that Black women WERE in strong contention, regardless of final choice.
My point is this: Biden needs a Black running mate as much as Bill Clinton did, in order to turn out Black voters. That is, he don't.
The Black chattering classes are the Black voters.
Harris and Booker were already long out of it by South Carolina, and of course as you know neither is that popular in the Black community for various reasons anyway.
I don't know, this seems different. After raising the prospects of selecting a Black running mate, especially after the last few months, it would reinforce all the reservations they have about the Democrats.
IF White chattering classes and White voters are NOT identical, then why is that also not true of Black voters. Unless you are citing actual polling or somesuch?
And WHY were Harris & Booker out of it pre-SC? Was it because they could NOT make headway versus Uncle Joe, the man who stood by Obama through thick & thin?
As for expectations, that has been mostly expectations of NYT op-ed writers, bloggers, etc - mostly liberal White people.
Because there isn't as much difference between the two.
Were you even watching the primaries? At the time Harris and Booker were out of it Bernie was in the lead, followed by Buttigieg, with Biden trailing and even his polling in the south was drifting. It was only after the other candidates metaphorically bludgeoned each-other in the debates that Biden was only candidate left standing with any significant enough appeal to the black community.
We'll see; maybe you're right, maybe it doesn't matter.
After 9 out of 58 elections the vice-president took over the office during the term. I was surprised it was that many.
4 deaths from illness: WH Harrison > Tyler Taylor > Fillmore Harding > Coolidge FD Roosevelt > Truman
3 assassinations: Lincoln > A Johnson McKinley > T Roosevelt Kennedy > LB Johnson
Gerald Ford succeeded Nixon, but was never elected Vice President (or President)
The bad thing is with Biden's age combined with how divided, bitter and heavily armed the USA is right now, I wouldn't rule out either scenario tragically occurring within the next 4 years.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
And seriously crap musical instruments (banjos, squeezeboxes).
ETA as noted on the previous thread, someone is nibbling Gretchen Whitmer, who'd earlier been largely dismissed as a contender.
Kamala Harris fans have logged into Betfair and she is now clear favourite again at 2.26 (roughly 5/4) but we should of course remember it is not long ago she was odds-on.
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted * Poor/non-existant contact tracing * Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism * Teenagers * Seasonal workers * Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols * Slaughterhouses and care homes
So basically seems like they took their eye off the ball and tried to get back to normal, only to see the virus return as a result.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted * Poor/non-existant contact tracing * Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism * Teenagers * Seasonal workers * Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols * Slaughterhouses and care homes
So basically seems like they took their eye off the ball and tried to get back to normal, only to see the virus return as a result.
And, in particular, they took their eye off the ball in relation to super spreader events/activities/locations, such as tourism, bars/clubs, slaughterhouses and care homes.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Not so much as you would notice. I used to live and work in Holland. It's a great country.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
It's all double Dutch to me ...
Me too - I have a well thumbed Dutch to Dutch dictionary.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Not so much as you would notice. I used to live and work in Holland. It's a great country.
Don't tell someone from Maastricht that you think Holland is a country ...
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Not so much as you would notice. I used to live and work in Holland. It's a great country.
Don't tell someone from Maastricht that you think Holland is a country ...
I plead ignorance - it was back in 1971. I was in Eindhoven
Random anecdote with possible VP betting implications.
Driving my kids to camp today, I had to drive up Senator Harris's street in Brentwood, Los Angeles. There was a police block, and we had to detour a long way around.
Now, this may be nothing - like construction work. Or it could be unrelated political - like a visit from the Governor.
Or it could have been Biden. Is his schedule public?
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted * Poor/non-existant contact tracing * Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism * Teenagers * Seasonal workers * Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols * Slaughterhouses and care homes
So basically seems like they took their eye off the ball and tried to get back to normal, only to see the virus return as a result.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Not so much as you would notice. I used to live and work in Holland. It's a great country.
Don't tell someone from Maastricht that you think Holland is a country ...
I plead ignorance - it was back in 1971. I was in Eindhoven
The Netherlands is the country, Holland is an area bordering on the North Sea. See the map in this article:
Random anecdote with possible VP betting implications.
Driving my kids to camp today, I had to drive up Senator Harris's street in Brentwood, Los Angeles. There was a police block, and we had to detour a long way around.
Now, this may be nothing - like construction work. Or it could be unrelated political - like a visit from the Governor.
Or it could have been Biden. Is his schedule public?
Random anecdote with possible VP betting implications.
Driving my kids to camp today, I had to drive up Senator Harris's street in Brentwood, Los Angeles. There was a police block, and we had to detour a long way around.
Now, this may be nothing - like construction work. Or it could be unrelated political - like a visit from the Governor.
Or it could have been Biden. Is his schedule public?
Perhaps there to protect her from hordes of consultants pretending to be paparazzi, or visa versa,
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Not so much as you would notice. I used to live and work in Holland. It's a great country.
Don't tell someone from Maastricht that you think Holland is a country ...
I plead ignorance - it was back in 1971. I was in Eindhoven
The Netherlands is the country, Holland is an area bordering on the North Sea. See the map in this article:
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Not so much as you would notice. I used to live and work in Holland. It's a great country.
Don't tell someone from Maastricht that you think Holland is a country ...
I plead ignorance - it was back in 1971. I was in Eindhoven
The Netherlands is the country, Holland is an area bordering on the North Sea. See the map in this article:
Random anecdote with possible VP betting implications.
Driving my kids to camp today, I had to drive up Senator Harris's street in Brentwood, Los Angeles. There was a police block, and we had to detour a long way around.
Now, this may be nothing - like construction work. Or it could be unrelated political - like a visit from the Governor.
Or it could have been Biden. Is his schedule public?
One thing I think we should thank Trump for even though I dont like the guy
The american president was always regarded somewhat as the leader of the western world. The americans put a joke in and we realised the sky didn't fall. Doesnt really matter anymore who they put in apart from betting opportunities his station is just another country leader among many
Not quite as bad as when UP published premature report in Nov 1918 that armistice had been signed. But not great for Politico.
One possible explanation: Politico has prepared stories for every eventuality, and somehow this one ended up getting published. OR could be scoop just bit too early. My guess is, it's first option.
BUT certainly does explain baracades in Brentwood (NOT a notably insurrectionary quarter of El Lay).
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Not so much as you would notice. I used to live and work in Holland. It's a great country.
Don't tell someone from Maastricht that you think Holland is a country ...
I plead ignorance - it was back in 1971. I was in Eindhoven
The Netherlands is the country, Holland is an area bordering on the North Sea. See the map in this article:
Not quite as bad as when UP published premature report in Nov 1918 that armistice had been signed. But not great for Politico.
One possible explanation: Politico has prepared stories for every eventuality, and somehow this one ended up getting published. OR could be scoop just bit too early. My guess is, it's first option.
BUT certainly does explain baracades in Brentwood (NOT a notably insurrectionary quarter of El Lay).
Kamala Harris is now 1.77 on Betfair. We do not know if this is a genuine sign or merely due to the false and/or prophetic story; well, I don't.
ETA as noted on the previous thread, someone is nibbling Gretchen Whitmer, who'd earlier been largely dismissed as a contender.
Kamala Harris fans have logged into Betfair and she is now clear favourite again at 2.26 (roughly 5/4) but we should of course remember it is not long ago she was odds-on.
Not quite as bad as when UP published premature report in Nov 1918 that armistice had been signed. But not great for Politico.
One possible explanation: Politico has prepared stories for every eventuality, and somehow this one ended up getting published. OR could be scoop just bit too early. My guess is, it's first option.
BUT certainly does explain baracades in Brentwood (NOT a notably insurrectionary quarter of El Lay).
Kamala Harris is now 1.77 on Betfair. We do not know if this is a genuine sign or merely due to the false and/or prophetic story; well, I don't.
It seems Joe Biden was actually in Delaware, making this whole story less likely.
The Sky paper review is not good for those hoping a second wave is not on us
It seems right across Europe countries are seeing worrying evidence of increased covid and the common denominator appears to be young people gathering in large groups
For all those attacking HMG today, Boris has got this right and indeed Nicola is telling Scots not to book foreign holidays
One third of worldwide infections have occurred this month. The plague is accelerating. Just going through a quiet spell in Europe I fear.
I think the most likely source of imported infection will now be from the subcontinent. Indeed that may already be part of the explanation for the current geography of UK coronavirus.
Well yes, and this is a massive elephant in the room, isn’t it. Because even if current quarantine rules are followed they would likely be insufficient against this problem.
People going on holiday to Europe tend to go in family groups and with people they live with. Hopefully most are taking reasonable precautions when out there. And if subject to quarantine would have less “leakage” when they got back.
But visitors from the subcontinent are far more likely to be individual family members coming to stay with other family members. Even if they subject themselves to quarantine, this will not apply to the people they live with unless they become symptomatic and/or return a positive test. By which time it will be too late.
We really need to be banning travel from the subcontinent full stop - or imposing “hotel quarantine” on travel from there. Trouble is, an attempt to distinguish like this will be howled down as racist.
It was poorly phrased, but I think Foxy’s point might rather have been prompted by the though that having fought a war avowedly against tyranny, it made it simply impossible to maintain any kind of national determination to hang on to empire.
The British Empire was never synonymous with tyranny - rather the reverse in many cases, such as India (if you want to look for tyranny locally, look to the Mughals..). And certainly the British public at the time wouldn't have thought it was. The reason why the Empire collapsed after WWII was the fact that Britain was fatally weakened and the US - which had always hated the British Empire - was ascendant.
I think our domination of India was likely doomed after the 1919 massacre in Amritsar. The subsequent rise of Indian nationalism was always going to be irresistible.
I would place a claim for the Second Boer War as a turning point of Empire. Not only because of some spectacular defeats, but also the public exposure of our cruelty in the treatment of the Boer families in the concentration camps. It was a phyrric victory, and within a decade South Africa was effectively independent.
Perhaps; after all, Gandhi, who thought himself first and foremost British, was radicalised by his experiences in South Africa. The cognitive dissonance of a democracy maintaining an empire was unsustainable.
Empire are inherently evil. Commonwealths, on other hand, have a natural capacity (however compromised at any one time) for good.
Interesting that in South Africa, the true role of the British turned out to be the defense of the Blacks. Thus earning the loyalty of non-White South Africans from Boer War forward.
One problem was proclivity of HM Govt in selling out Africans in favor of Afrikaaner, often with acquiescence if not urging of Anglo South Africans.
I am not sure that either the Xhosa or Zulu wars are supportive of the British being the defenders of Black South Africans.
South Africa is a beautiful and tragic country, but part of the fascination is that their tourist slogan "a world in one country" is true in so many ways. The history of the place really is the world in miniature.
Within a generation of those wars, Xhosa & Zulu were most definitely pro-Brit viz-a-viz Afrikaners.
Agree truly a fascinating country! Re: Africans & Afrikaners, interesting that Mandela achieved breakthrough by learning Afrikaans, absorbing large elements of Afrikaner culture & identity (such as rugby) and then dealing with their leaders face to face, eye to eye, man to man.
Afrikaaner culture has so much in common with US hillbilly culture. Guns, covered wagons, an unforgiving religion, a sense of manifest destiny, a love of the outdoors, its pretty much all there. A Protestant culture abroad long enough to have bypassed the European Enlightenment.
Also when out on a date here, if each person pays their own way, it's called going Dutch.
Saddened by your anti-Batavian prejudice! Shocking use of the D-word to defame a great little people (or is that visa versa).
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Not so much as you would notice. I used to live and work in Holland. It's a great country.
Don't tell someone from Maastricht that you think Holland is a country ...
I plead ignorance - it was back in 1971. I was in Eindhoven
The Netherlands is the country, Holland is an area bordering on the North Sea. See the map in this article:
True, but for some Dutch from the non-Holland parts of the Netherlands, referring to the country as Holland is almost as red meat as it would be for a Scot to hear Scotland being referred to as a part of England.
The Sky paper review is not good for those hoping a second wave is not on us
It seems right across Europe countries are seeing worrying evidence of increased covid and the common denominator appears to be young people gathering in large groups
For all those attacking HMG today, Boris has got this right and indeed Nicola is telling Scots not to book foreign holidays
One third of worldwide infections have occurred this month. The plague is accelerating. Just going through a quiet spell in Europe I fear.
I think the most likely source of imported infection will now be from the subcontinent. Indeed that may already be part of the explanation for the current geography of UK coronavirus.
Well yes, and this is a massive elephant in the room, isn’t it. Because even if current quarantine rules are followed they would likely be insufficient against this problem.
People going on holiday to Europe tend to go in family groups and with people they live with. Hopefully most are taking reasonable precautions when out there. And if subject to quarantine would have less “leakage” when they got back.
But visitors from the subcontinent are far more likely to be individual family members coming to stay with other family members. Even if they subject themselves to quarantine, this will not apply to the people they live with unless they become symptomatic and/or return a positive test. By which time it will be too late.
We really need to be banning travel from the subcontinent full stop - or imposing “hotel quarantine” on travel from there. Trouble is, an attempt to distinguish like this will be howled down as racist.
The two biggest worries about a Covid second wave in the UK are a) imported from the sub-continent and b) dispersed domestically by traveller communities. Holidaymakers in Spain is something of a sideshow in comparison.
Starmer said: “We are lucky to have many world-class tourist destinations across the UK. But the jobs crisis facing tourist towns is stark.”
Starmer's started saying it now!
What's wrong with that?
Because saying something is "world class" doesn't make it so.
What a daft comment from you. (I was a lot ruder than that but decided to temper it.)
I travel all over the world. Have done most of my life. There are plenty of destinations in the UK which are world-class. Furthermore, our leaders need right now to encourage people not to travel. To 'Staycation.'
So Starmer and Johnson are absolutely right to emphasise our own world-class options. It's called leadership.
If you can't find anything sensible to criticise go away and do something useful.
Starmer said: “We are lucky to have many world-class tourist destinations across the UK. But the jobs crisis facing tourist towns is stark.”
Starmer's started saying it now!
What's wrong with that?
Because saying something is "world class" doesn't make it so.
What a daft comment from you. (I was a lot ruder than that but decided to temper it.)
I travel all over the world. Have done most of my life. There are plenty of destinations in the UK which are world-class. Furthermore, our leaders need right now to encourage people not to travel. To 'Staycation.'
So Starmer and Johnson are absolutely right to emphasise our own world-class options. It's called leadership.
If you can't find anything sensible to criticise go away and do something useful.
That's not what Starmer's getting at. He's saying that they are world class but because people can't go to them, they need bailing out.
Spain had a very strict lockdown, plus everyone wearing facemasks, even outside. Why are they experiencing a rise in cases?
Note your own use of the past tense “had”. Then factor in imported cases due to tourism.
The elephant in the room is airports. Not just in Spain, but worldwide. Governments need to come down on them like a ton of bricks, eg. with total prohibition of shops and restaurants within airports; and “quarantine” meaning quarantine.
Spain had a very strict lockdown, plus everyone wearing facemasks, even outside. Why are they experiencing a rise in cases?
Note your own use of the past tense “had”. Then factor in imported cases due to tourism.
The elephant in the room is airports. Not just in Spain, but worldwide. Governments need to come down on them like a ton of bricks, eg. with total prohibition of shops and restaurants within airports; and “quarantine” meaning quarantine.
I thought the touristy areas didn't have it? Isn't that the basis for the complaints from the travel industry?
Honestly, the government releases 50,000 free £50 bike repair vouchers late last night, and even at 5.30 am the website has collapsed under the pressure. I have wasted the last 45 minutes fruitlessly trying to register for the scheme, but it is like trying to buy tickets for the Olympics. And I don’t think parts of the government website even work, at least on an iPad.
The Sky paper review is not good for those hoping a second wave is not on us
It seems right across Europe countries are seeing worrying evidence of increased covid and the common denominator appears to be young people gathering in large groups
For all those attacking HMG today, Boris has got this right and indeed Nicola is telling Scots not to book foreign holidays
One third of worldwide infections have occurred this month. The plague is accelerating. Just going through a quiet spell in Europe I fear.
I think the most likely source of imported infection will now be from the subcontinent. Indeed that may already be part of the explanation for the current geography of UK coronavirus.
Well yes, and this is a massive elephant in the room, isn’t it. Because even if current quarantine rules are followed they would likely be insufficient against this problem.
People going on holiday to Europe tend to go in family groups and with people they live with. Hopefully most are taking reasonable precautions when out there. And if subject to quarantine would have less “leakage” when they got back.
But visitors from the subcontinent are far more likely to be individual family members coming to stay with other family members. Even if they subject themselves to quarantine, this will not apply to the people they live with unless they become symptomatic and/or return a positive test. By which time it will be too late.
We really need to be banning travel from the subcontinent full stop - or imposing “hotel quarantine” on travel from there. Trouble is, an attempt to distinguish like this will be howled down as racist.
The two biggest worries about a Covid second wave in the UK are a) imported from the sub-continent and b) dispersed domestically by traveller communities. Holidaymakers in Spain is something of a sideshow in comparison.
Traveller communities are pretty self contained and doubt they have the interactions to create a wider second wave
Starmer said: “We are lucky to have many world-class tourist destinations across the UK. But the jobs crisis facing tourist towns is stark.”
Starmer's started saying it now!
What's wrong with that?
Because saying something is "world class" doesn't make it so.
What a daft comment from you. (I was a lot ruder than that but decided to temper it.)
I travel all over the world. Have done most of my life. There are plenty of destinations in the UK which are world-class. Furthermore, our leaders need right now to encourage people not to travel. To 'Staycation.'
So Starmer and Johnson are absolutely right to emphasise our own world-class options. It's called leadership.
If you can't find anything sensible to criticise go away and do something useful.
So true: Hampstead, St John's Wood, Fitzrovia, Belsize Park, Bloomsbury, Covent Garden, Primrose Hill. The UK is full of world class destinations
Honestly, the government releases 50,000 free £50 bike repair vouchers late last night, and even at 5.30 am the website has collapsed under the pressure. I have wasted the last 45 minutes fruitlessly trying to register for the scheme, but it is like trying to buy tickets for the Olympics. And I don’t think parts of the government website even work, at least on an iPad.
Fix Your Bike Voucher Scheme Due to extreme volumes of traffic this resource has been temporarily paused whilst we take action to improve performance for users
Spain had a very strict lockdown, plus everyone wearing facemasks, even outside. Why are they experiencing a rise in cases?
Note your own use of the past tense “had”. Then factor in imported cases due to tourism.
The elephant in the room is airports. Not just in Spain, but worldwide. Governments need to come down on them like a ton of bricks, eg. with total prohibition of shops and restaurants within airports; and “quarantine” meaning quarantine.
Tracel per se is dangerous and holidays abroad this year are a daft idea. However, the vast majority of outbreaks here in Spain relate to agricultural workers and internal tourism - family gatherings, parties, dscos, etc. The hard lockdown needed to be eased more gradually and night time venues should have been much more strictly controlled. I believe they are still closed in the UK which makes sense.
Spain had a very strict lockdown, plus everyone wearing facemasks, even outside. Why are they experiencing a rise in cases?
Note your own use of the past tense “had”. Then factor in imported cases due to tourism.
The elephant in the room is airports. Not just in Spain, but worldwide. Governments need to come down on them like a ton of bricks, eg. with total prohibition of shops and restaurants within airports; and “quarantine” meaning quarantine.
Tracel per se is dangerous and holidays abroad this year are a daft idea. However, the vast majority of outbreaks here in Spain relate to agricultural workers and internal tourism - family gatherings, parties, dscos, etc. The hard lockdown needed to be eased more gradually and night time venues should have been much more strictly controlled. I believe they are still closed in the UK which makes sense.
Travel is just moving through space, which all except those hiding indoors are already doing. Travel by air is clearly a significant risk but it is perfectly possible to travel abroad just as safely as travelling to the supermarket or local pub.
If you restrict travel to relatively safe locations abroad, all you do is increase further the crush at popular UK resorts. Last week I was in the Cotswolds, Cornwall and the Dorset coast, and now I am back on the island, and the crush at some of the popular spots has to be seen to be believed. The island so far is the least crowded, presumably the additional cost and hassle of crossing the water remains a deterrent.
Spain had a very strict lockdown, plus everyone wearing facemasks, even outside. Why are they experiencing a rise in cases?
Note your own use of the past tense “had”. Then factor in imported cases due to tourism.
The elephant in the room is airports. Not just in Spain, but worldwide. Governments need to come down on them like a ton of bricks, eg. with total prohibition of shops and restaurants within airports; and “quarantine” meaning quarantine.
Tracel per se is dangerous and holidays abroad this year are a daft idea. However, the vast majority of outbreaks here in Spain relate to agricultural workers and internal tourism - family gatherings, parties, dscos, etc. The hard lockdown needed to be eased more gradually and night time venues should have been much more strictly controlled. I believe they are still closed in the UK which makes sense.
Internal tourism, as you imply, is far from risk-free. I fail to see the problem with simply accepting that this year everyone ought to holiday within their own small corner of the world. Most people have tons of things to do and see within an hour or two of their home. Self-education, self-improvement and thrift used to be considered part of the very foundations of European society. Hard to see why they went out of fashion.
I return to work on Monday after over five weeks holiday (I have rights to ridiculously long periods of leave) and have only travelled within a tight corner of the country. We have had a great time, and have seen and done lots of things we would have missed if we’d taken a fortnight in Sicily (our recent favourite).
Honestly, the government releases 50,000 free £50 bike repair vouchers late last night, and even at 5.30 am the website has collapsed under the pressure. I have wasted the last 45 minutes fruitlessly trying to register for the scheme, but it is like trying to buy tickets for the Olympics. And I don’t think parts of the government website even work, at least on an iPad.
Purely a PR stunt. Unless you are living in poverty abstain for applying for things like this.
Most people can repair a bicycle: 80% of repair & maintenance is within the competence of anybody (Google is your friend, and most libraries stock a book on cycle maintenance), and the 20% that is tricky and usually needs an experienced bike technician is relatively cheap.
Starmer said: “We are lucky to have many world-class tourist destinations across the UK. But the jobs crisis facing tourist towns is stark.”
Starmer's started saying it now!
What's wrong with that?
Because saying something is "world class" doesn't make it so.
Blairite modernisation all over again. Modernisation tended to mean buggering something up by reorganising it for no good reason.
Eg the Tory “re-organisation” of local government in the 1970s which abolished the historic shires and burghs? History will judge Johnson as harshly as Blair: much shuffling of deckchairs while the ship slowly sinks.
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted * Poor/non-existant contact tracing * Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism * Teenagers * Seasonal workers * Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols * Slaughterhouses and care homes
So basically seems like they took their eye off the ball and tried to get back to normal, only to see the virus return as a result.
Spain? Or England?
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted * Poor/non-existant contact tracing * Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism * Teenagers * Seasonal workers * Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols * Slaughterhouses and care homes
Starmer said: “We are lucky to have many world-class tourist destinations across the UK. But the jobs crisis facing tourist towns is stark.”
Starmer's started saying it now!
What's wrong with that?
Because saying something is "world class" doesn't make it so.
What a daft comment from you. (I was a lot ruder than that but decided to temper it.)
I travel all over the world. Have done most of my life. There are plenty of destinations in the UK which are world-class. Furthermore, our leaders need right now to encourage people not to travel. To 'Staycation.'
So Starmer and Johnson are absolutely right to emphasise our own world-class options. It's called leadership.
If you can't find anything sensible to criticise go away and do something useful.
So true: Hampstead, St John's Wood, Fitzrovia, Belsize Park, Bloomsbury, Covent Garden, Primrose Hill. The UK is full of world class destinations
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted * Poor/non-existant contact tracing * Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism * Teenagers * Seasonal workers * Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols * Slaughterhouses and care homes
So basically seems like they took their eye off the ball and tried to get back to normal, only to see the virus return as a result.
Spain? Or England?
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted * Poor/non-existant contact tracing * Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism * Teenagers * Seasonal workers * Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols * Slaughterhouses and care homes
Comments
WH Harrison > Tyler
Taylor > Fillmore
Harding > Coolidge
FD Roosevelt > Truman
3 assassinations:
Lincoln > A Johnson
McKinley > T Roosevelt
Kennedy > LB Johnson
Gerald Ford succeeded Nixon, but was never elected Vice President (or President)
Were you even watching the primaries? At the time Harris and Booker were out of it Bernie was in the lead, followed by Buttigieg, with Biden trailing and even his polling in the south was drifting. It was only after the other candidates metaphorically bludgeoned each-other in the debates that Biden was only candidate left standing with any significant enough appeal to the black community.
We'll see; maybe you're right, maybe it doesn't matter.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1288235713503338496?s=19
https://time.com/5871218/spain-coronavirus-cases/
They put it down to:
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted
* Poor/non-existant contact tracing
* Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism
* Teenagers
* Seasonal workers
* Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols
* Slaughterhouses and care homes
So basically seems like they took their eye off the ball and tried to get back to normal, only to see the virus return as a result.
Bet you also like to talk about D____ courage, D____ uncles, D____ auctions & other D____ stereotypes. Sir, have you no shame?
Driving my kids to camp today, I had to drive up Senator Harris's street in Brentwood, Los Angeles. There was a police block, and we had to detour a long way around.
Now, this may be nothing - like construction work. Or it could be unrelated political - like a visit from the Governor.
Or it could have been Biden. Is his schedule public?
https://hollandreviewed.com/the-difference-between-holland-and-the-netherlands/
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/28/us/great-white-shark-attack-maine-trnd/index.html
Guess what web address the official Netherlands tourist board website uses? That's right!
https://www.holland.com/global/tourism.htm
https://www.foxnews.com/media/politico-biden-vp-kamala-harris-running-mate-mistake
The american president was always regarded somewhat as the leader of the western world. The americans put a joke in and we realised the sky didn't fall. Doesnt really matter anymore who they put in apart from betting opportunities his station is just another country leader among many
One possible explanation: Politico has prepared stories for every eventuality, and somehow this one ended up getting published. OR could be scoop just bit too early. My guess is, it's first option.
BUT certainly does explain baracades in Brentwood (NOT a notably insurrectionary quarter of El Lay).
Susan Rice: 4.4
Tammy Duckworth: 15.5
Karen Bass: 16.5
Elizabeth Warren: 20
Val Demings: 24
Gretchen Whitmer: 30
Michelle Obama: 44
Hillary Clinton: 75
Stacey Abrams: 90
Keisha Lance Bottoms: 95
Michelle Lujan Grisham: 140
Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. delivered his vision to combat racial inequities in the economy during a speech on Tuesday in Wilmington, Del.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/28/us/elections/biden-vs-trump.html#link-4e05e420
People going on holiday to Europe tend to go in family groups and with people they live with. Hopefully most are taking reasonable precautions when out there. And if subject to quarantine would have less “leakage” when they got back.
But visitors from the subcontinent are far more likely to be individual family members coming to stay with other family members. Even if they subject themselves to quarantine, this will not apply to the people they live with unless they become symptomatic and/or return a positive test. By which time it will be too late.
We really need to be banning travel from the subcontinent full stop - or imposing “hotel quarantine” on travel from there. Trouble is, an attempt to distinguish like this will be howled down as racist.
Starmer's started saying it now!
The COVID-19 pandemic is prompting companies to adopt remote work policies, accelerating the digital shift of the workspace
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/05/23/business/working-from-home/
I travel all over the world. Have done most of my life. There are plenty of destinations in the UK which are world-class. Furthermore, our leaders need right now to encourage people not to travel. To 'Staycation.'
So Starmer and Johnson are absolutely right to emphasise our own world-class options. It's called leadership.
If you can't find anything sensible to criticise go away and do something useful.
The elephant in the room is airports. Not just in Spain, but worldwide. Governments need to come down on them like a ton of bricks, eg. with total prohibition of shops and restaurants within airports; and “quarantine” meaning quarantine.
Fix Your Bike Voucher Scheme
Due to extreme volumes of traffic this resource has been temporarily paused whilst we take action to improve performance for users
If you restrict travel to relatively safe locations abroad, all you do is increase further the crush at popular UK resorts. Last week I was in the Cotswolds, Cornwall and the Dorset coast, and now I am back on the island, and the crush at some of the popular spots has to be seen to be believed. The island so far is the least crowded, presumably the additional cost and hassle of crossing the water remains a deterrent.
I return to work on Monday after over five weeks holiday (I have rights to ridiculously long periods of leave) and have only travelled within a tight corner of the country. We have had a great time, and have seen and done lots of things we would have missed if we’d taken a fortnight in Sicily (our recent favourite).
The new thread is over there ->
Most people can repair a bicycle: 80% of repair & maintenance is within the competence of anybody (Google is your friend, and most libraries stock a book on cycle maintenance), and the 20% that is tricky and usually needs an experienced bike technician is relatively cheap.
* Poor social distancing since lockdown was lifted
* Poor/non-existant contact tracing
* Encouraging visitors from overseas for tourism
* Teenagers
* Seasonal workers
* Bars and clubs not following social distancing protocols
* Slaughterhouses and care homes