Mr. glw, this does make me wonder: how strong does a torch have to be before vampires are vanquished by one?
If vampires shy away from the light around sunrise, which isn't very bright, then I'd say one of the cheap LED torches you can pick up in a supermarket should do the job. You can damn near blind yourself with a torch that costs just a few quid.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
Bayes doesn't begin to be relevant. Be a selfish arse if you like, but stop trying to be clever about it.
Bayes is relevant. There is currently very little evidence about transmission after the jab. But there is a prior. If the vaccine stimulates the T-Cells and generates antibodies to the virus, sufficient to stop symptoms it is likely to reduce or eliminate viral load and transmission by asymptotics. There isn't evidence for that yet, and certainly no evidence against it. As evidence accumulates, and it will quickly, the prior will be updated.
If there is "very little evidence about transmission", then the posterior will be the same as the prior.
You will get out of Bayes Theorem exactly what you put in. The posterior distribution is the prior (which is flat as there is no evidence).
So, IshmaelZ is correct. If there is no evidence, then Bayes Theorem "doesn't begin to be relevant".
In my opinion, frontline workers (doctors, nurses, teachers, delivery staff, bus drivers) should be at the front of the vaccine queue. Nor selfish geriatrics.
The prior is not necessarily based on evidence. It can be based on science or reasoning before any evidence becomes available. It isn't flat. There is no evidence for Russell's flying teapot but that doesn't mean the chance is 50/50.
If I am shown a six sided dice and asked what are the chances it will come up with a six, I will reply 1/6 without any evidence and bet on that basis. If, after a few dozen throws a six doesn't appear I will start to speculate that the dice is loaded and start to adjust the probabilities in line with the evidence using Bayes Law.
Sure, you can choose what you want for the prior. (Though in a case like this, an uninformative prior is recommended).
If the likelihood contains no information (as is the case here), the posterior is the prior.
When the posterior as returned as the prior, the correct inference is that the data are not informing the posterior. You conclude you have no information on which to make a judgement call.
If, at some point in the future, we have a likelihood then Bayes Theorem may become relevant. Not until then.
Someone earlier opined it would have been so much nicer if the Europeans had held a national day of gratitude to Britain for their liberation from tyranny in the second world war.
What was it someone said - the Americans provided the money, the Russians provided the blood and the British provided the time.
I must have forgotten our Day of Gratitude to the Soviet Union and our Day of Gratitude to the United States as well as our day of thanks to the Canadians, Australians, Indian, South African, New Zealand and other Commonwealth (sorry, Empire) forces for their not inconsiderable assistance.
There's an article in this month's History magazine opining WW2 has become our new religion. We use it as a moral compass - evil is defined in terms of Hitler, Naziism and the Holocaust. Calling someone a "Nazi" for example is the ultimate insult. Denying the Holocaust is considered morally abhorrent in a way 9/11 conspiracy theorists aren't.
That's how we frame evil - we ignore all the myriad other instances of human brutality in the 20th Century and settle on the Third Reich as the ultimate manifestation of inhumanity.
It then becomes quasi-religious and self-perpetuating in the individual and collective psyche. We call those who fought Naziism as "the greatest generation" which implicitly suggests past and future generations don't measure up. Verbal imagery conjuring notions of events from 80 years ago remains commonplace - the exhortations of our current Prime Minister are soaked in those cultural references.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
Ummm...what about the City of Edinburgh, previously Europe’s third or fourth largest financial centre, depending on how you measure it?
A very good question, given the mood music amongst the hitherto pro-Union Edinburgh professional classes.
Apropos of nothing, Edinburgh also had highest Remain vote of all major cities in the UK. Calling them Remoaners and plastering the place with Union flags will be bringing them round though.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
Bayes doesn't begin to be relevant. Be a selfish arse if you like, but stop trying to be clever about it.
Bayes is relevant. There is currently very little evidence about transmission after the jab. But there is a prior. If the vaccine stimulates the T-Cells and generates antibodies to the virus, sufficient to stop symptoms it is likely to reduce or eliminate viral load and transmission by asymptotics. There isn't evidence for that yet, and certainly no evidence against it. As evidence accumulates, and it will quickly, the prior will be updated.
If there is "very little evidence about transmission", then the posterior will be the same as the prior.
You will get out of Bayes Theorem exactly what you put in. The posterior distribution is the prior (which is flat as there is no evidence).
So, IshmaelZ is correct. If there is no evidence, then Bayes Theorem "doesn't begin to be relevant".
In my opinion, frontline workers (doctors, nurses, teachers, delivery staff, bus drivers) should be at the front of the vaccine queue. Nor selfish geriatrics.
The prior is not necessarily based on evidence. It can be based on science or reasoning before any evidence becomes available. It isn't flat. There is no evidence for Russell's flying teapot but that doesn't mean the chance is 50/50.
If I am shown a six sided dice and asked what are the chances it will come up with a six, I will reply 1/6 without any evidence and bet on that basis. If, after a few dozen throws a six doesn't appear I will start to speculate that the dice is loaded and start to adjust the probabilities in line with the evidence using Bayes Law.
Sure, you can choose what you want for the prior. (Though in a case like this, an uninformative prior is recommended).
If the likelihood contains no information (as is the case here), the posterior is the prior.
When the posterior as returned as the prior, the correct inference is that the data are not informing the posterior. You conclude you have no information on which to make a judgement call.
If, at some point in the future, we have a likelihood then Bayes Theorem may become relevant. Not until then.
Mr. glw, this does make me wonder: how strong does a torch have to be before vampires are vanquished by one?
If vampires shy away from the light around sunrise, which isn't very bright, then I'd say one of the cheap LED torches you can pick up in a supermarket should do the job. You can damn near blind yourself with a torch that costs just a few quid.
It it light in general that is supposed to vanquish vampires, or some specific property of sunlight? Does it just need to be bright, or is the spectral distribution important? What about the UV and IR components?
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
So just a soundbite. Unless your taking about affirmative action of some kind, it's hard to imagine how Erasmus could be made any fairer. It was open to all students on the relevant courses and covered almost all the costs involved. It was perfectly designed for working class students like me.
But it sounds like it will be affirmative action, perhaps by allowing different numbers from different universities. if Erasmus was perfectly designed, then why were those taking advantage of it often more well-off?
Official data is hard to come by, but a large study in 2006 found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, around 50 per cent were from families with a high or considerably higher than average income. Across all countries sampled, only 14 per cent of respondents reported their income being lower than average while almost two thirds had at least one parent who held a job as an executive, professional or technician.
It was pretty expensive for us. The funding didn't go very far and I think we ended up doing 3 trips to Holland and back delivering, visiting and collecting the stuff. A very good experience for my daughter and we had a great time when we visited but it wasn't cheap.
Wow - the beam is focused on you rather than the inverse square law. It only mentions potential harm from heat but not from ionising radiation.
There is no potential harm from ionising radiation, the frequencies used are several orders of magnitude too low to do that. I would be like trying to break a window by throwing a feather at it, it just won't work. You need frequencies around 1,000 THz and above to ionise. Even the most advanced 5G mmWave will only go up to a few hundred GHz.
Anyone who thinks 5G radio can ionise things ought to do the work to demonstrate how and then wait to collect their inevitable Nobel prize.
I want the Lib Dems to become a proscribed organisation as they've fallen down the 5G conspiracy theory bullshit rabbit hole.
No fecking way I'm tactically voting for the Lib Dems in future elections.
Another way of looking at it, is that if 5G radio was ionising radiation then so would be all of the frequencies above it. Photon energy is proportional to frequency. So for one example, a torch would be a deadly weapon. Has anyone told the Lib Dems that torches are deadly weapons? When are the Lib Dems going to do something about the dangers of torches?
I think it's more a case of Hobhouse having crossed the line from taking the concerns of her constituents seriously to pandering to the irrational fears of a subset thereof. Sometimes the customer isn't right, even in politics!
Apparently the recorded reasons in the minutes are (a) inappropriate development in the green belt and (b) visual impact on the AONB and landscape. Which is fair enough. So nothing to do with the topics Cohen raises on 5G and certainly nothing to do with wild XAnon theorires of 5G and Covid-19! A straight smear by Cohen.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
Why you shouldn't go
If you are wrong you get to infect people, potentially killing some
If you are right....you have deferred your skiing trip for a few months
What you have said here is that your skiing trip is worth more than other peoples lives if you decide to take the gamble you are right.
Mr. glw, this does make me wonder: how strong does a torch have to be before vampires are vanquished by one?
If vampires shy away from the light around sunrise, which isn't very bright, then I'd say one of the cheap LED torches you can pick up in a supermarket should do the job. You can damn near blind yourself with a torch that costs just a few quid.
It it light in general that is supposed to vanquish vampires, or some specific property of sunlight? Does it just need to be bright, or is the spectral distribution important? What about the UV and IR components?
I don't think Stoker was specific about it. It seems to come down to the notion that sunlight is life-giving and therefore good, and in comparison moonlight (despite it being reflected sunlight) is somehow sinister. I dare say someone has written a vampire novel which tries to pin down exactly what it is about sunlight that harms them.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
It's not skiing people are against. It's the fact that there is a certain section of skiiers even on here that seem to think its perfectly ok to go on foreign skiing trips during a global pandemic when travel isn't in the least advisable.
If the UK government or the government of the skiing resort advises against it, then you shouldn't go. That's very clear. But if some anonymous bloke on the internet advises against it, well ....
What happened to the lecturer at Aber you mentioned the other day apropos our Turing discussion ?
He should surely have been dismissed for sexual harassment, but I could not find any mention of such a case anywhere.
(Of course, the traditional way Universities deal with such matters is by writing glowing letters of recommendation, so the harasser ends up as Regius Professor of Modern History somewhere else, or whatever).
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
You're the one who views being exceptional as above not me.
Exceptional can be better or it can be worse.
I see no reason to aspire to unexceptionalism though.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
So just a soundbite. Unless your taking about affirmative action of some kind, it's hard to imagine how Erasmus could be made any fairer. It was open to all students on the relevant courses and covered almost all the costs involved. It was perfectly designed for working class students like me.
But it sounds like it will be affirmative action, perhaps by allowing different numbers from different universities. if Erasmus was perfectly designed, then why were those taking advantage of it often more well-off?
Official data is hard to come by, but a large study in 2006 found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, around 50 per cent were from families with a high or considerably higher than average income. Across all countries sampled, only 14 per cent of respondents reported their income being lower than average while almost two thirds had at least one parent who held a job as an executive, professional or technician.
It was pretty expensive for us. The funding didn't go very far and I think we ended up doing 3 trips to Holland and back delivering, visiting and collecting the stuff. A very good experience for my daughter and we had a great time when we visited but it wasn't cheap.
I drove myself to Germany in a Morris Ital that was a month away from an MOT that it hadn't a hope of passing, the keys to which I'd won in a game of poker. The car was subsequently abandoned, and I drove myself back in a rented van at the end of the year.
The following year, a girl I'd met in Germany become my girlfriend while she was on her Erasmus year in the UK. She later became my wife.
Wow - the beam is focused on you rather than the inverse square law. It only mentions potential harm from heat but not from ionising radiation.
There is no potential harm from ionising radiation, the frequencies used are several orders of magnitude too low to do that. I would be like trying to break a window by throwing a feather at it, it just won't work. You need frequencies around 1,000 THz and above to ionise. Even the most advanced 5G mmWave will only go up to a few hundred GHz.
Anyone who thinks 5G radio can ionise things ought to do the work to demonstrate how and then wait to collect their inevitable Nobel prize.
I want the Lib Dems to become a proscribed organisation as they've fallen down the 5G conspiracy theory bullshit rabbit hole.
No fecking way I'm tactically voting for the Lib Dems in future elections.
Come to Labour, we need your mind
Jeez, it's in a worse state than we could ever have imagined.....
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means better. More resilient. More creative. More entrepreneurial. More imaginative. And all the rest of it. Better.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
It's not skiing people are against. It's the fact that there is a certain section of skiiers even on here that seem to think its perfectly ok to go on foreign skiing trips during a global pandemic when travel isn't in the least advisable.
If the UK government or the government of the skiing resort advises against it, then you shouldn't go. That's very clear. But if some anonymous bloke on the internet advises against it, well ....
The FCDO advises against all but essential travel to:
the whole of Switzerland based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.
What happened to the lecturer at Aber you mentioned the other day apropos our Turing discussion ?
He should surely have been dismissed for sexual harassment, but I could not find any mention of such a case anywhere.
(Of course, the traditional way Universities deal with such matters is by writing glowing letters of recommendation, so the harasser ends up as Regius Professor of Modern History somewhere else, or whatever).
He was on a temporary contract. It wasn’t renewed. There was as a result no formal disciplinary.
First half of 2020 is going to be full of scenes of jabbed up pensioners jetting off everywhere (With a smattering of nurses) whilst the rest of us are still trying to swerve the virus.
'Fraid so. At least you won't catch it from us.
No evidence the jab significantly reduces transmission.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Apply Bayes.
Why you shouldn't go
If you are wrong you get to infect people, potentially killing some
If you are right....you have deferred your skiing trip for a few months
What you have said here is that your skiing trip is worth more than other peoples lives if you decide to take the gamble you are right.
Mr. glw, this does make me wonder: how strong does a torch have to be before vampires are vanquished by one?
If vampires shy away from the light around sunrise, which isn't very bright, then I'd say one of the cheap LED torches you can pick up in a supermarket should do the job. You can damn near blind yourself with a torch that costs just a few quid.
It it light in general that is supposed to vanquish vampires, or some specific property of sunlight? Does it just need to be bright, or is the spectral distribution important? What about the UV and IR components?
I don't think Stoker was specific about it. It seems to come down to the notion that sunlight is life-giving and therefore good, and in comparison moonlight (despite it being reflected sunlight) is somehow sinister. I dare say someone has written a vampire novel which tries to pin down exactly what it is about sunlight that harms them.
In the modern stuff, it is all about UV. UV flashlights and flash bangs etc....
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
So just a soundbite. Unless your taking about affirmative action of some kind, it's hard to imagine how Erasmus could be made any fairer. It was open to all students on the relevant courses and covered almost all the costs involved. It was perfectly designed for working class students like me.
But it sounds like it will be affirmative action, perhaps by allowing different numbers from different universities. if Erasmus was perfectly designed, then why were those taking advantage of it often more well-off?
Official data is hard to come by, but a large study in 2006 found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, around 50 per cent were from families with a high or considerably higher than average income. Across all countries sampled, only 14 per cent of respondents reported their income being lower than average while almost two thirds had at least one parent who held a job as an executive, professional or technician.
It was pretty expensive for us. The funding didn't go very far and I think we ended up doing 3 trips to Holland and back delivering, visiting and collecting the stuff. A very good experience for my daughter and we had a great time when we visited but it wasn't cheap.
I drove myself to Germany in a Morris Ital that was a month away from an MOT that it hadn't a hope of passing, the keys to which I'd won in a game of poker. The car was subsequently abandoned, and I drove myself back in a rented van at the end of the year.
The following year, a girl I'd met in Germany become my girlfriend while she was on her Erasmus year in the UK. She later became my wife.
My daughter made some excellent friends through it and they are planning a reunion post Covid. Its great but its a middle class jolly, no doubt about it.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
It's not skiing people are against. It's the fact that there is a certain section of skiiers even on here that seem to think its perfectly ok to go on foreign skiing trips during a global pandemic when travel isn't in the least advisable.
If the UK government or the government of the skiing resort advises against it, then you shouldn't go. That's very clear. But if some anonymous bloke on the internet advises against it, well ....
The FCDO advises against all but essential travel to:
the whole of Switzerland based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.
I wouldn't go to Switzerland at the moment! In fact I wouldn't go anywhere skiing at the moment and probably won't later in the Spring if governments advise against it, but if anonymous blokes on the internet etc etc.
Who is the Vicar of Bath?, do you mean the Vicar of Bray?
While both are fictional characters the "Rev" Stuart Campbell is a prominent Cybernat - a long time supporter of the SNP, now somewhat disillusioned - involved in a court case with the former Slab leader Kezia Dugdale which he lost, twice:
The reference to "Bath" is his place of residence, as according to some Nats its entirely appropriate for people who live outside Scotland to support independence, its entirely inappropriate if they oppose it. What with them being joyous & civic....
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
It is nailed on we are getting Tier 4++++ it is just when. I wonder if we get Oxford vaccine announcement tomorrow, we will get it then i.e. its the Calvary is on the way, but we need you to lockdown for another 2 months.
Time to deploy the army and keep people locked in their houses.
Internment for all skiers or anyone who has been on a skiing holiday in the last twenty years and anyone who has a skiing holiday booked.
These skiers will be interned in Stoke, it is the only way they will learn.
Apparently Stoke currently just like Switzerland....
Wow - the beam is focused on you rather than the inverse square law. It only mentions potential harm from heat but not from ionising radiation.
There is no potential harm from ionising radiation, the frequencies used are several orders of magnitude too low to do that. I would be like trying to break a window by throwing a feather at it, it just won't work. You need frequencies around 1,000 THz and above to ionise. Even the most advanced 5G mmWave will only go up to a few hundred GHz.
Anyone who thinks 5G radio can ionise things ought to do the work to demonstrate how and then wait to collect their inevitable Nobel prize.
I want the Lib Dems to become a proscribed organisation as they've fallen down the 5G conspiracy theory bullshit rabbit hole.
No fecking way I'm tactically voting for the Lib Dems in future elections.
Come to Labour, we need your mind
I can't vote Labour either, I'm a fiscal conservative and unabashed free marketeer.
Well on those two criteria alone, that puts Johnson's Conservatives at the very bottom of your list of parties, to whom you could lend your vote.
Indeed, and I was a Tory activist for twenty two years.
I still cannot process the party is cheering that they've just undone one of Mrs Thatcher's finest achievements, the one that made trading across borders easily.
But hey ho, the modern day Tory party seems intent on delivering large parts of Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto.
I would respond, but any criticism aimed at the ludicrous act of self-harm that we have just inflicted upon ourselves, will be shot down in flames by Thommo, so what's the point?
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
If having distinct legal traditions means you can't be in a union together then it's bad news for the Anglo-Scottish union. The Irish drive on the left, and seem to quite like being in the EU. Every country thinks it is exceptional (the French are as boring as we are on this subject, possibly more so).
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
Poor old Norns, the most British of all and excluded yet again.
Another interesting implication of The Sun story is that the UK only plan to have about 18m vaccinated in the first 5 months (which jibes with the 1m a week vaccinations in the Sunday Torygraph story)
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
Must be why Ireland, Malta and Cyprus want to leave the EU too, and why landlocked Switzerland is so keen to join. Oh wait...
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
Poor old Norns, the most British of all and excluded again.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
Poor old Norns, the most British of all and excluded again.
Would land barriers have stopped Philip II, Napoleon or Hitler?
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
You're the one who views being exceptional as above not me.
Exceptional can be better or it can be worse.
I see no reason to aspire to unexceptionalism though.
Deflecting and obscuring. The usual sign that not all is not well. You've made a faux pas, a "tell" has slipped forth, and you realize it. It's far from the first time. My advice - as always of the benign and constructive variety - is that you should take a leaf from the @MarqueeMark and @eadric book of Brexit and concentrate on explaining and illustrating what you believe rather than a pretense that you believe something different.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
If having distinct legal traditions means you can't be in a union together then it's bad news for the Anglo-Scottish union. The Irish drive on the left, and seem to quite like being in the EU. Every country thinks it is exceptional (the French are as boring as we are on this subject, possibly more so).
In case you missed it I think the Anglo-Scottish union should end. 🤔
Every country is exceptional. There is nothing wrong with that, it is only the likes of kinabalu who seem to deign a belief in exceptionalism as a bad thing. I don't know when becoming mundane was meant to be an aspiration.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
It's not skiing people are against. It's the fact that there is a certain section of skiiers even on here that seem to think its perfectly ok to go on foreign skiing trips during a global pandemic when travel isn't in the least advisable.
I ski, a lot. I just have no plans to do so this season (or rather a positive plan not to do so). Selfish wankers are the enemy, not skiers.
Which is why I said a certain section . Same applies to those that jetted off for sand sea and surf
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Doesn't it occur to you that the people of every country see their own as exceptional though? Certainly the ones I have experience with (Germans and Americans) do. Germans, for example, tend to automatically see themselves as the only ones who are capable of doing a job properly. They just don't crow about their supposedly innate exceptionalism as much as Brits do.
One benefit that Erasmus brings is the realisation that aspects of life that you thought were uniquely British are actually shared by others, and also the discovery that things you thought were commonplace are actually uniquely British!
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
You're the one who views being exceptional as above not me.
Exceptional can be better or it can be worse.
I see no reason to aspire to unexceptionalism though.
Deflecting and obscuring. The usual sign that not all is not well. You've made a faux pas, a "tell" has slipped forth, and you realize it. It's far from the first time. My advice - as always of the benign and constructive variety - is that you should take a leaf from the @MarqueeMark and @eadric book of Brexit and concentrate on explaining and illustrating what you believe rather than a pretense that you believe something different.
There's no faux pas. I belief in what I said 100% and will say it again.
You haven't answered why you view anything other than mass conformity as outrageous. What is wrong with not wanting to be mundane?
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
The fishing industry was in the CFP so were banned by the EU from catching large quantities of fish from UK waters, they will now be able to catch more of their own fish from UK waters.
Now Boris could have gone for No Deal so the fishing industry could have got 100% of the catch from their fishing waters but that would have meant you whinging even more because of the damage to the rest of the economy.
You cannot be both anti No Deal Brexit and pro Farage and No Deal and reclaiming all our waters at the same time, tough!!
It is the FISHING INDUSTRY that is "whinging". With sneering Tories like you telling them to stfu. Please keep it up - will be a fabulous weapon in the coming war of Brexit succession.
At most fishermen would go to UKIP or Farage, they are not going to vote for any party that will take the UK back in the CFP even if they will not vote Tory
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
why landlocked Switzerland is so keen to join. Oh wait...
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
So just a soundbite. Unless your taking about affirmative action of some kind, it's hard to imagine how Erasmus could be made any fairer. It was open to all students on the relevant courses and covered almost all the costs involved. It was perfectly designed for working class students like me.
But it sounds like it will be affirmative action, perhaps by allowing different numbers from different universities. if Erasmus was perfectly designed, then why were those taking advantage of it often more well-off?
Official data is hard to come by, but a large study in 2006 found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, around 50 per cent were from families with a high or considerably higher than average income. Across all countries sampled, only 14 per cent of respondents reported their income being lower than average while almost two thirds had at least one parent who held a job as an executive, professional or technician.
It was pretty expensive for us. The funding didn't go very far and I think we ended up doing 3 trips to Holland and back delivering, visiting and collecting the stuff. A very good experience for my daughter and we had a great time when we visited but it wasn't cheap.
I drove myself to Germany in a Morris Ital that was a month away from an MOT that it hadn't a hope of passing, the keys to which I'd won in a game of poker. The car was subsequently abandoned, and I drove myself back in a rented van at the end of the year.
The following year, a girl I'd met in Germany become my girlfriend while she was on her Erasmus year in the UK. She later became my wife.
My daughter made some excellent friends through it and they are planning a reunion post Covid. Its great but its a middle class jolly, no doubt about it.
Is it any more middle class than going to university in the first place, though?
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Do you think Brexit will make Ireland and the Irish happier with their EU membership?
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Different is exceptional. Exceptional means unusual or not typical - the UK is not usual or typical within the EU, nothing wrong with that. But then every country can have its own differences that make it exceptional - nothing wrong with that either.
If you think the UK is not exceptional then you are saying it is unexceptional - and I would ask you to defend that frame of thought. It certainly isn't mine, why would you consider the UK to be unexceptional?
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
Must be why Ireland, Malta and Cyprus want to leave the EU too, and why landlocked Switzerland is so keen to join. Oh wait...
History shows that if you are on mainland Europe, a huge army somewhere on that continent is a very big problem
If you're offshore with a decent Navy, its a good deal less of a problem.
That can't help but shape how people look at life.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Oh, and have you apologised for you and your rights holding up the talks with the EU?
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Doesn't it occur to you that the people of every country see their own as exceptional though? Certainly the ones I have experience with (Germans and Americans) do. Germans, for example, tend to automatically see themselves as the only ones who are capable of doing a job properly. They just don't crow about their supposedly innate exceptionalism as much as Brits do.
One benefit that Erasmus brings is the realisation that aspects of life that you thought were uniquely British are actually shared by others, and also the discovery that things you thought were commonplace are actually uniquely British!
Of course it does!
Every country should see their own as exceptional. It is a good thing not a bad thing!
I don't frame exceptionalism as a negative or a uniquely British philosophy.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
If having distinct legal traditions means you can't be in a union together then it's bad news for the Anglo-Scottish union. The Irish drive on the left, and seem to quite like being in the EU. Every country thinks it is exceptional (the French are as boring as we are on this subject, possibly more so).
Some countries are more prone to exceptionalism than others, I would say. Of the old Western-allied countries of Europe of the Cold War, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Greece are particuiarly prone to historical exceptionalism, in my experience.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
The fishing industry was in the CFP so were banned by the EU from catching large quantities of fish from UK waters, they will now be able to catch more of their own fish from UK waters.
Now Boris could have gone for No Deal so the fishing industry could have got 100% of the catch from their fishing waters but that would have meant you whinging even more because of the damage to the rest of the economy.
You cannot be both anti No Deal Brexit and pro Farage and No Deal and reclaiming all our waters at the same time, tough!!
It is the FISHING INDUSTRY that is "whinging". With sneering Tories like you telling them to stfu. Please keep it up - will be a fabulous weapon in the coming war of Brexit succession.
At most fishermen would go to UKIP or Farage, they are not going to vote for any party that will take the UK back in the CFP even if they will not vote Tory
In other words they can go fuck themselves as far as you are concerned.
The difference is actually in his Tweet. It is commonplace. We expect what we expect and only comment on the unexpected.
Golly, is there no end to Dawkins' noshitSherlockisms? He should write a book...
You might think it is a noshitSherlock but actually people fall down on that quite frequently. They think that things aren't possible because they aren't used to it, or something must be one way or another because they are used to it - and the reality is that is simply how it is because that is the way we have evolved but there is no requirement to be that way. It is just what worked best at the time.
Nope. Can't even sketch the merest outline of a point there.
Rosiest of rose-tinted Panglossian specs on - we should marvel at the commonplace. Didn't realize he was becoming a mystic in his dotage.
I don't know. Some of Darwin's very finest work was on stuff in his backyard or rather back garden - he ended up writing a whole book on the importance of earthworms for instance. In that vein there's the parasitologist who found a major new field of ecological interactions (massive parasite modification of feeding chains with great effects on the chains) in the local ponds. Just to make the point, this person had believed common wisdom and thought ti a rare effect - so travelled somewhere remote like SA only to discover that the local hosts that season were either absent or healthy. So returned home, and went for a walk ...
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
It's not skiing people are against. It's the fact that there is a certain section of skiiers even on here that seem to think its perfectly ok to go on foreign skiing trips during a global pandemic when travel isn't in the least advisable.
If the UK government or the government of the skiing resort advises against it, then you shouldn't go. That's very clear. But if some anonymous bloke on the internet advises against it, well ....
The FCDO advises against all but essential travel to:
the whole of Switzerland based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Do you think Brexit will make Ireland and the Irish happier with their EU membership?
They seem happy enough so far. After all, the EU appears to have made sure that Eire has got what it needed out of the Brexit Deal. The UK defending the interests of Ulster Unionists... rather less so.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
It doesn't say you aren't allowed to talk about it, so I don't know why you've framed it that way. Several people including those in those tweets are merely advising that it is an ineffective tactic so suggesting or pleading that people not do so, at least as much. Not least since the 'slammed shut' outrage may well be incorrect depending on the replacement scheme.
People will be entitled to be upset about it. But I cannot see why it is unreasonable that others are suggesting it is unlikely to outrage many others. As it has been hammered home so hard some people are not just airing a grievance, they think it is a winning tactic politically, when I suspect there are much grander losses a lot more people will miss.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
The fishing industry was in the CFP so were banned by the EU from catching large quantities of fish from UK waters, they will now be able to catch more of their own fish from UK waters.
Now Boris could have gone for No Deal so the fishing industry could have got 100% of the catch from their fishing waters but that would have meant you whinging even more because of the damage to the rest of the economy.
You cannot be both anti No Deal Brexit and pro Farage and No Deal and reclaiming all our waters at the same time, tough!!
It is the FISHING INDUSTRY that is "whinging". With sneering Tories like you telling them to stfu. Please keep it up - will be a fabulous weapon in the coming war of Brexit succession.
At most fishermen would go to UKIP or Farage, they are not going to vote for any party that will take the UK back in the CFP even if they will not vote Tory
You're forgetting whatever lot Mr Galloway is with (or will be - I can't keep track). Or for that matter Michelle Bannatyne. If she stands as an independent she could drain off some of the votes from the Borders seaboard.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
So "WE are more exceptional" means this sort of thing, does it. Counting in miles and driving on the left but sitting on the right and stuff. Sounds a bit prosaic. I sense there's a little more to it than that. I mean, we are hardly going to "unleash our potential" outside the EU by copying their road rules and driving habits.
I cannot, but I don't follow your point since the other one I presume you are referring to was pretty clearly ironic without needing to defend him in any way.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Different is exceptional. Exceptional means unusual or not typical - the UK is not usual or typical within the EU, nothing wrong with that. But then every country can have its own differences that make it exceptional - nothing wrong with that either.
If you think the UK is not exceptional then you are saying it is unexceptional - and I would ask you to defend that frame of thought. It certainly isn't mine, why would you consider the UK to be unexceptional?
You said "we are more different", giving four examples of that. I showed how in at least three of those we are not different from all other EU member states, and in any case there's no evidence that they would make a difference to our views on EU membership, which aiui was the OP's point.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
Must be why Ireland, Malta and Cyprus want to leave the EU too, and why landlocked Switzerland is so keen to join. Oh wait...
History shows that if you are on mainland Europe, a huge army somewhere on that continent is a very big problem
If you're offshore with a decent Navy, its a good deal less of a problem.
That can't help but shape how people look at life.
Indeed.
But there's also a key difference between the UK, Malta, Cyprus and Ireland.
We had the Navy etc to keep ourselves separated from the island and other threats.
The other islands mentioned didn't have what they needed to keep themselves separated from us.
We have a history of being OK by ourselves. Other nations don't necessarily. A possible reason for us to have more self-confidence on going it alone.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
It's not skiing people are against. It's the fact that there is a certain section of skiiers even on here that seem to think its perfectly ok to go on foreign skiing trips during a global pandemic when travel isn't in the least advisable.
If the UK government or the government of the skiing resort advises against it, then you shouldn't go. That's very clear. But if some anonymous bloke on the internet advises against it, well ....
The FCDO advises against all but essential travel to:
the whole of Switzerland based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.
My comment on Panglossian interpretations was related to Dawkins' intent in writing that, not in relation to how wondrous the commonplace can be.
Indeed, I try to marvel at the commonplace every day, especially when walking the dogs - deliberately opening up the senses to experience how wonderful nature truly is. In these COVID days, it puts things in perspective and lightens things up a lot. But then I am truly lucky to have a 75-acre backyard.
Nope. Can't even sketch the merest outline of a point there.
Rosiest of rose-tinted Panglossian specs on - we should marvel at the commonplace. Didn't realize he was becoming a mystic in his dotage.
I don't know. Some of Darwin's very finest work was on stuff in his backyard or rather back garden - he ended up writing a whole book on the importance of earthworms for instance. In that vein there's the parasitologist who found a major new field of ecological interactions (massive parasite modification of feeding chains with great effects on the chains) in the local ponds. Just to make the point, this person had believed common wisdom and thought ti a rare effect - so travelled somewhere remote like SA only to discover that the local hosts that season were either absent or healthy. So returned home, and went for a walk ...
Another interesting implication of The Sun story is that the UK only plan to have about 18m vaccinated in the first 5 months (which jibes with the 1m a week vaccinations in the Sunday Torygraph story)
At 2 injections each person, 5 months is more than a million injections per week.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Do you think Brexit will make Ireland and the Irish happier with their EU membership?
They seem happy enough so far. After all, the EU appears to have made sure that Eire has got what it needed out of the Brexit Deal. The UK defending the interests of Ulster Unionists... rather less so.
The DUP will likely vote for the Deal, it was only the WA they opposed
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
The fishing industry was in the CFP so were banned by the EU from catching large quantities of fish from UK waters, they will now be able to catch more of their own fish from UK waters.
Now Boris could have gone for No Deal so the fishing industry could have got 100% of the catch from their fishing waters but that would have meant you whinging even more because of the damage to the rest of the economy.
You cannot be both anti No Deal Brexit and pro Farage and No Deal and reclaiming all our waters at the same time, tough!!
It is the FISHING INDUSTRY that is "whinging". With sneering Tories like you telling them to stfu. Please keep it up - will be a fabulous weapon in the coming war of Brexit succession.
At most fishermen would go to UKIP or Farage, they are not going to vote for any party that will take the UK back in the CFP even if they will not vote Tory
You're forgetting whatever lot Mr Galloway is with (or will be - I can't keep track). Or for that matter Michelle Bannatyne. If she stands as an independent she could drain off some of the votes from the Borders seaboard.
Galloway is a Unionist anyway as is Bannatyne, on the list it does not matter if they elect Unionist MSPs still
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
If having distinct legal traditions means you can't be in a union together then it's bad news for the Anglo-Scottish union. The Irish drive on the left, and seem to quite like being in the EU. Every country thinks it is exceptional (the French are as boring as we are on this subject, possibly more so).
In my experience, some countries are more prone to exceptionalism than others. Of the old Western-allied countries of Europe of the cold war, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Greece are particuiarly prone to historical exceptionalism, in my experience.
They all have reason to think they are exceptional. Britain had the world's largest empire and started the industrial revolution, France's revolution transformed Western history, the Germans are the most successful country in Europe and would dominate the continent if not for their mid century over reach, Italy had Rome and the Greeks invented Western civilisation. The tragedy for the UK is that while we sit around pleasuring ourselves about our glorious past, the world moves on without us. No country in Europe is more than a mid tier power these days. Combined, the EU has significant economic and regulatory clout, but no real political or military power at the moment. Brexit is a gamble that the EU will never become a real power, and that we are better off as a small power in the US orbit.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
If having distinct legal traditions means you can't be in a union together then it's bad news for the Anglo-Scottish union. The Irish drive on the left, and seem to quite like being in the EU. Every country thinks it is exceptional (the French are as boring as we are on this subject, possibly more so).
In my experience, some countries are more prone to exceptionalism than others. Of the old Western-allied countries of Europe of the cold war, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Greece are particuiarly prone to historical exceptionalism, in my experience.
The tragedy for the UK is that while we sit around pleasuring ourselves about our glorious past, the world moves on without us.
The number of people who do that in this country are vanishingly small, if noisy, and far outnumbered by the people who obsess over how we supposedly do it. It's like when a counter protest outnumbers the protest.
And no, self important rhetoric from politicians doesn't affect that.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
So "WE are more exceptional" means this sort of thing, does it. Counting in miles and driving on the left but sitting on the right and stuff. Sounds a bit prosaic. I sense there's a little more to it than that. I mean, we are hardly going to "unleash our potential" outside the EU by copying their road rules and driving habits.
We can unleash our potential by having our own Parliament decide our own laws rather than navigating the horridly Byzantine 27 nations QMV system.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
The fishing industry was in the CFP so were banned by the EU from catching large quantities of fish from UK waters, they will now be able to catch more of their own fish from UK waters.
Now Boris could have gone for No Deal so the fishing industry could have got 100% of the catch from their fishing waters but that would have meant you whinging even more because of the damage to the rest of the economy.
You cannot be both anti No Deal Brexit and pro Farage and No Deal and reclaiming all our waters at the same time, tough!!
It is the FISHING INDUSTRY that is "whinging". With sneering Tories like you telling them to stfu. Please keep it up - will be a fabulous weapon in the coming war of Brexit succession.
At most fishermen would go to UKIP or Farage, they are not going to vote for any party that will take the UK back in the CFP even if they will not vote Tory
You're forgetting whatever lot Mr Galloway is with (or will be - I can't keep track). Or for that matter Michelle Bannatyne. If she stands as an independent she could drain off some of the votes from the Borders seaboard.
Galloway is a Unionist anyway
Well he is now, but Galloway has changed positions as many times as he's changed his hat, party, football team and residence.
Amazing that there are still people travelling from the UK to go skiing. And now they want their refunds after evading Swiss quarantine illegally. Let them GF themselves.
There is stupidity; there is blonde-shocked Johnsonian stupidity; there is monumental incoherent Trumpian stupidity.
And finally there is the stupidity of the skiers who need to have their selfish time in the mountains, even as pandemic rages.
I bet they nearly all voted Remain.....
Just so we’re clear, is that your take or “the ordinary public’s”?
I think it was tongue in cheek. Or am I being too generous?
The anti-skiing brigade on here amuses me. There is something about skiing that really riles them. I assume it an anti-elitist thing. I bet they nearly all voted Leave ..
Skiing, like golf, is the ultimate socially distanced sport in the fresh air. The problem, like golf, is in the apres-ski bar or club house. Avoid that, and you are safer than staying at home.
It's not skiing people are against. It's the fact that there is a certain section of skiiers even on here that seem to think its perfectly ok to go on foreign skiing trips during a global pandemic when travel isn't in the least advisable.
If the UK government or the government of the skiing resort advises against it, then you shouldn't go. That's very clear. But if some anonymous bloke on the internet advises against it, well ....
The FCDO advises against all but essential travel to:
the whole of Switzerland based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.
Are people able to get travel insurance? I know people do go abroad without insurance, but I certainly wouldn't want to go skiing without it.
I imagine so, but wouldn't expect it to cover anything plague related.
Usually going against FCO advice is enough to get cover cancelled. I renewed my annual insurance this year and it covers me for COVID-related medical costs and the costs of having to cut a holiday short unexpectedly, but not cancellation and disruption (although I can cover myself against that by booking flexible flights and ree-cancellation hotels). But I can't go anywhere subject to an FCO "do not travel" advisory
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Different is exceptional. Exceptional means unusual or not typical - the UK is not usual or typical within the EU, nothing wrong with that. But then every country can have its own differences that make it exceptional - nothing wrong with that either.
If you think the UK is not exceptional then you are saying it is unexceptional - and I would ask you to defend that frame of thought. It certainly isn't mine, why would you consider the UK to be unexceptional?
You said "we are more different", giving four examples of that. I showed how in at least three of those we are not different from all other EU member states, and in any case there's no evidence that they would make a difference to our views on EU membership, which aiui was the OP's point.
But you are wrong.
In three of those there are other nations that are also exceptional on those issues. That doesn't stop us from being exceptional too.
There is no monopoly on exceptionalism. Being exceptional is in fact unexceptional, every nation is exceptional.
It was the OP who is obsessed with the UK's exceptionalism which he views as a negative. I do not. Yes we are exceptional. But yes so too are other nations.
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
So just a soundbite. Unless your taking about affirmative action of some kind, it's hard to imagine how Erasmus could be made any fairer. It was open to all students on the relevant courses and covered almost all the costs involved. It was perfectly designed for working class students like me.
But it sounds like it will be affirmative action, perhaps by allowing different numbers from different universities. if Erasmus was perfectly designed, then why were those taking advantage of it often more well-off?
Official data is hard to come by, but a large study in 2006 found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, around 50 per cent were from families with a high or considerably higher than average income. Across all countries sampled, only 14 per cent of respondents reported their income being lower than average while almost two thirds had at least one parent who held a job as an executive, professional or technician.
It was pretty expensive for us. The funding didn't go very far and I think we ended up doing 3 trips to Holland and back delivering, visiting and collecting the stuff. A very good experience for my daughter and we had a great time when we visited but it wasn't cheap.
I drove myself to Germany in a Morris Ital that was a month away from an MOT that it hadn't a hope of passing, the keys to which I'd won in a game of poker. The car was subsequently abandoned, and I drove myself back in a rented van at the end of the year.
The following year, a girl I'd met in Germany become my girlfriend while she was on her Erasmus year in the UK. She later became my wife.
My daughter made some excellent friends through it and they are planning a reunion post Covid. Its great but its a middle class jolly, no doubt about it.
Correct, the UK fishing industry will regain some catch through this Deal from EU boats, the financial services sector however got no guaranteed access to the EU market.
The main loser from this Deal is the City of London not fishermen, though it is big enough to survive and much of its market is now outside the EU anyway
What I don't understand HYUFD is is why you in your forest and your extensive experience of the fishing industry know more about the reality of their situation than the fishermen do. Hasn't anyone told the guys on the boats, in the processing and handling industries etc etc that whatever they know its wrong and they should speak to you instead to understand the facts?
So far its fishing that has been first in line for the Tory patronising lecture. Other industries keep popping on with "hang on, wtf!" comments as the detailed impacts on them become clear, and I am sure that HYUFD et al will be here to tell them with all of their real world knowledge why they are wrong about their own industry.
The fishing industry was in the CFP so were banned by the EU from catching large quantities of fish from UK waters, they will now be able to catch more of their own fish from UK waters.
Now Boris could have gone for No Deal so the fishing industry could have got 100% of the catch from their fishing waters but that would have meant you whinging even more because of the damage to the rest of the economy.
You cannot be both anti No Deal Brexit and pro Farage and No Deal and reclaiming all our waters at the same time, tough!!
It is the FISHING INDUSTRY that is "whinging". With sneering Tories like you telling them to stfu. Please keep it up - will be a fabulous weapon in the coming war of Brexit succession.
At most fishermen would go to UKIP or Farage, they are not going to vote for any party that will take the UK back in the CFP even if they will not vote Tory
You're forgetting whatever lot Mr Galloway is with (or will be - I can't keep track). Or for that matter Michelle Bannatyne. If she stands as an independent she could drain off some of the votes from the Borders seaboard.
Galloway is a Unionist anyway as is Bannatyne, on the list it does not matter if they elect Unionist MSPs still
Do you think Brexit will make Ireland and the Irish happier with their EU membership?
They seem happy enough so far. After all, the EU appears to have made sure that Eire has got what it needed out of the Brexit Deal. The UK defending the interests of Ulster Unionists... rather less so.
But a more integrated EU, with tax harmonisation, is surely more likely post-Brexit?
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Three of those four are true of Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, which seem happy in the EU.
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Do you think Brexit will make Ireland and the Irish happier with their EU membership?
They seem happy enough so far. After all, the EU appears to have made sure that Eire has got what it needed out of the Brexit Deal. The UK defending the interests of Ulster Unionists... rather less so.
The DUP will likely vote for the Deal, it was only the WA they opposed
I'm sure they will. After all, the alternative is even worse, and the Deal reduces the sting of the NI Protocol. Which, thanks to President-Elect Biden, wasn't going in the bin, deal or no deal.
But- the Brexit Package as a whole is formalities between GB and NI and a Stormont Lock which looks pretty inoperable.
The 2021 arrangements are much closer to the Nationalist vision of Ireland than the Unionist one.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
If having distinct legal traditions means you can't be in a union together then it's bad news for the Anglo-Scottish union. The Irish drive on the left, and seem to quite like being in the EU. Every country thinks it is exceptional (the French are as boring as we are on this subject, possibly more so).
In my experience, some countries are more prone to exceptionalism than others. Of the old Western-allied countries of Europe of the cold war, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Greece are particuiarly prone to historical exceptionalism, in my experience.
They all have reason to think they are exceptional. Britain had the world's largest empire and started the industrial revolution, France's revolution transformed Western history, the Germans are the most successful country in Europe and would dominate the continent if not for their mid century over reach, Italy had Rome and the Greeks invented Western civilisation. The tragedy for the UK is that while we sit around pleasuring ourselves about our glorious past, the world moves on without us. No country in Europe is more than a mid tier power these days. Combined, the EU has significant economic and regulatory clout, but no real political or military power at the moment. Brexit is a gamble that the EU will never become a real power, and that we are better off as a small power in the US orbit.
The tragedy is people trying to roll back the clock and trying to invent a European power rather than moving on from the power struggles of the past.
Europe is a tiny fraction of the globe. Europeans make up about 7% of all of humanity - why piss about with European "powers"?
Brexit isn't a gamble that the EU will never become a real power - it is moving on from power struggles of the past and the UK moving on as a self-assured grown up independent nation on the global not local stage.
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
So "WE are more exceptional" means this sort of thing, does it. Counting in miles and driving on the left but sitting on the right and stuff. Sounds a bit prosaic. I sense there's a little more to it than that. I mean, we are hardly going to "unleash our potential" outside the EU by copying their road rules and driving habits.
Why do YOU keep capitalising the WE inside quotes as if Phil's doing that?
Why aren't we allowed to talk about it? As a working class lad from the Midlands, Erasmus was an opportunity that changed my life, but it's a door that's been slammed shut for my son. I have as much right to air my dismay at this as anyone else has to air their particular grievances.
The new scheme being introduced is actually focused more on working class families, so the door is certainly not being slammed shut.
In what way is it focussed more on working class families?
No details yet, but the objective is clear:
The new scheme will also target students from disadvantaged backgrounds and areas which did not previously have many students benefiting from Erasmus+, making life-changing opportunities accessible to everyone across the country.
So just a soundbite. Unless your taking about affirmative action of some kind, it's hard to imagine how Erasmus could be made any fairer. It was open to all students on the relevant courses and covered almost all the costs involved. It was perfectly designed for working class students like me.
But it sounds like it will be affirmative action, perhaps by allowing different numbers from different universities. if Erasmus was perfectly designed, then why were those taking advantage of it often more well-off?
Official data is hard to come by, but a large study in 2006 found that of those taking part in Erasmus from the UK, around 50 per cent were from families with a high or considerably higher than average income. Across all countries sampled, only 14 per cent of respondents reported their income being lower than average while almost two thirds had at least one parent who held a job as an executive, professional or technician.
It was pretty expensive for us. The funding didn't go very far and I think we ended up doing 3 trips to Holland and back delivering, visiting and collecting the stuff. A very good experience for my daughter and we had a great time when we visited but it wasn't cheap.
I drove myself to Germany in a Morris Ital that was a month away from an MOT that it hadn't a hope of passing, the keys to which I'd won in a game of poker. The car was subsequently abandoned, and I drove myself back in a rented van at the end of the year.
The following year, a girl I'd met in Germany become my girlfriend while she was on her Erasmus year in the UK. She later became my wife.
My daughter made some excellent friends through it and they are planning a reunion post Covid. Its great but its a middle class jolly, no doubt about it.
Is it any more middle class than going to university in the first place, though?
Seems likely it is, along with years abroad after studying and gap years etc. Perhaps too the middle classes instill a slightly more adventurous mindset into their children too - more likely to have been on interesting holidays.
I'd hope that with Turing the government does something that's a little better than Erasmus. It'd be a poor show if they didn't given the great name they've associated with the scheme.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
If having distinct legal traditions means you can't be in a union together then it's bad news for the Anglo-Scottish union. The Irish drive on the left, and seem to quite like being in the EU. Every country thinks it is exceptional (the French are as boring as we are on this subject, possibly more so).
In my experience, some countries are more prone to exceptionalism than others. Of the old Western-allied countries of Europe of the cold war, Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Greece are particuiarly prone to historical exceptionalism, in my experience.
They all have reason to think they are exceptional. Britain had the world's largest empire and started the industrial revolution, France's revolution transformed Western history, the Germans are the most successful country in Europe and would dominate the continent if not for their mid century over reach, Italy had Rome and the Greeks invented Western civilisation. The tragedy for the UK is that while we sit around pleasuring ourselves about our glorious past, the world moves on without us. No country in Europe is more than a mid tier power these days. Combined, the EU has significant economic and regulatory clout, but no real political or military power at the moment. Brexit is a gamble that the EU will never become a real power, and that we are better off as a small power in the US orbit.
Their "mid century over reach" - talk about your detached prose.
Different is exceptional. Exceptional means unusual or not typical - the UK is not usual or typical within the EU, nothing wrong with that. But then every country can have its own differences that make it exceptional - nothing wrong with that either.
If you think the UK is not exceptional then you are saying it is unexceptional - and I would ask you to defend that frame of thought. It certainly isn't mine, why would you consider the UK to be unexceptional?
Well, yes, and it was probably unwise to try to frame our future relationship with the EU in terms of the relationships enjoyed by others, We are not Norway or Switzerland or Canada or Turkey - they have relationships which work for them and that's fine.
The Trade Deal is the beginning of the definition of our future relationship with the European Union. There's much it covers and much that will evolve over time. I'm warming to it slowly though I'm not keen on the triumphalism of the pro-Johnson supporters.
I've never wanted the EU to fail nor to be in an unnecessarily adversarial relationship. I don't think many do but there's an undercurrent - we're outside now and the EU members must be allowed to evolve the organisation as they see fit.
I'm cautiously optimistic the political climate will also improve and in time all thoughts of re-joining will be set aside in favour of periodic re-negotiation to the Trade Deal to increase our alignment with the EU.
Mr. glw, this does make me wonder: how strong does a torch have to be before vampires are vanquished by one?
If vampires shy away from the light around sunrise, which isn't very bright, then I'd say one of the cheap LED torches you can pick up in a supermarket should do the job. You can damn near blind yourself with a torch that costs just a few quid.
It it light in general that is supposed to vanquish vampires, or some specific property of sunlight? Does it just need to be bright, or is the spectral distribution important? What about the UV and IR components?
I don't think Stoker was specific about it. It seems to come down to the notion that sunlight is life-giving and therefore good, and in comparison moonlight (despite it being reflected sunlight) is somehow sinister. I dare say someone has written a vampire novel which tries to pin down exactly what it is about sunlight that harms them.
In the modern stuff, it is all about UV. UV flashlights and flash bangs etc....
As Eddie Izzard famously asked, and what we would all like to know re crosses warding off vampires: do fingers work?
Someone earlier opined it would have been so much nicer if the Europeans had held a national day of gratitude to Britain for their liberation from tyranny in the second world war.
What was it someone said - the Americans provided the money, the Russians provided the blood and the British provided the time.
I must have forgotten our Day of Gratitude to the Soviet Union and our Day of Gratitude to the United States as well as our day of thanks to the Canadians, Australians, Indian, South African, New Zealand and other Commonwealth (sorry, Empire) forces for their not inconsiderable assistance.
There's an article in this month's History magazine opining WW2 has become our new religion. We use it as a moral compass - evil is defined in terms of Hitler, Naziism and the Holocaust. Calling someone a "Nazi" for example is the ultimate insult. Denying the Holocaust is considered morally abhorrent in a way 9/11 conspiracy theorists aren't.
That's how we frame evil - we ignore all the myriad other instances of human brutality in the 20th Century and settle on the Third Reich as the ultimate manifestation of inhumanity.
It then becomes quasi-religious and self-perpetuating in the individual and collective psyche. We call those who fought Naziism as "the greatest generation" which implicitly suggests past and future generations don't measure up. Verbal imagery conjuring notions of events from 80 years ago remains commonplace - the exhortations of our current Prime Minister are soaked in those cultural references.
Post of the day, well said. If someone is going to fetishise the war, the least they could do is gain some basic understanding of what actually happened.
Mr. kinabalu, I think that underestimates the unwitting nudge effect pro-EU politicians had over decades. Vowing to stand up to Brussels and for Britain (necessarily creating an adversarial rather than co-operative narrative) in opposition then doing the opposite in office. Blair's surrendering of half the rebate for nothing was astoundingly stupid.
Stoke up resentment, frustrate hopes of relief in office, refuse to even try and make an argument *for* the EU, promise then renege upon a referendum in a manifesto: these things were marvellous for opposition to the EU.
UKIP and Farage get headlines and loom large in the popular imagination but the fertile soil was cultivated and the seeds planted by short-sighted pro-EU politicians. In much the same way as the foolish Blair planned to 'kill nationalism stone dead' with devolution in Scotland, operating on the blithe assumption it would be a Labour fiefdom in perpetuity.
As an aside, that's also why advocates of English regional assemblies are wrong, and shockingly, obviously wrong at that. Slam down political dividing lines and political divisions will grow as a matter of course. Holyrood is a golden, shining example of this.
No, I don't think it does. There's some truth in what you say here - "not a lot" as Paul Daniels used to go but definitely some - and of course there were 17.4m reasons for voting Leave, none of them precisely identical, however I'm looking for the main overarching sentiment that binds the Brexit proposition into such a powerful and appealing whole.
And it's this. Exceptionalism. If we were to drill down deep into the entrails of a Leaver drawn at random from that 17.4m - metaphorically, I mean, not as a means of causing a prolonged and agonizing death - we would to a very high degree of probability find the belief that England and the English are not really European in the sense that, say, France and Germany are. The belief that, in terms of more than geography, we stand apart and a little above.
I wouldn't say above but it is blindingly obvious we do stand apart.
We are exceptional. There's nothing to be denied or ashamed about that. That doesn't mean we are better than others though, they can be exceptional in their own ways too.
If we feel exceptional only to the same degree other European nations feel exceptional the Brexit rocket would not have had sufficient fuel to gain lift-off let alone punch through the clouds and inner and outer space to reach its ultimate destination in its own new universe.
We are more exceptional than most continental European nations but so what? That doesn't make us better, it just makes us exceptional.
There is nothing wrong with being different. Why would you hate differences?
Most of your Brexit output is imbued with a sense that England is a cut above the Continentals. Sometimes it is there but passably subtle, and at other times it positively reeks of it. As in your "WE are more exceptional" opening sentence here.
What does more exceptional even mean?
It means we are more different.
We have Common Law they have Civil Law. We have miles. We drive on the left. We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
Most important for me is geography. Being an island has shaped our history, mentality and culture enormously.
Must be why Ireland, Malta and Cyprus want to leave the EU too, and why landlocked Switzerland is so keen to join. Oh wait...
History shows that if you are on mainland Europe, a huge army somewhere on that continent is a very big problem
If you're offshore with a decent Navy, its a good deal less of a problem.
That can't help but shape how people look at life.
Indeed.
But there's also a key difference between the UK, Malta, Cyprus and Ireland.
We had the Navy etc to keep ourselves separated from the island and other threats.
The other islands mentioned didn't have what they needed to keep themselves separated from us.
We have a history of being OK by ourselves. Other nations don't necessarily. A possible reason for us to have more self-confidence on going it alone.
I don;t think there's anything particularly glorious about this. Nature just stacked the odds massively against anybody who wanted to invade, relative to others, and we exploited those conditions somewhat. Not sure what's exceptional about that.
Comments
Someone earlier opined it would have been so much nicer if the Europeans had held a national day of gratitude to Britain for their liberation from tyranny in the second world war.
What was it someone said - the Americans provided the money, the Russians provided the blood and the British provided the time.
I must have forgotten our Day of Gratitude to the Soviet Union and our Day of Gratitude to the United States as well as our day of thanks to the Canadians, Australians, Indian, South African, New Zealand and other Commonwealth (sorry, Empire) forces for their not inconsiderable assistance.
There's an article in this month's History magazine opining WW2 has become our new religion. We use it as a moral compass - evil is defined in terms of Hitler, Naziism and the Holocaust. Calling someone a "Nazi" for example is the ultimate insult. Denying the Holocaust is considered morally abhorrent in a way 9/11 conspiracy theorists aren't.
That's how we frame evil - we ignore all the myriad other instances of human brutality in the 20th Century and settle on the Third Reich as the ultimate manifestation of inhumanity.
It then becomes quasi-religious and self-perpetuating in the individual and collective psyche. We call those who fought Naziism as "the greatest generation" which implicitly suggests past and future generations don't measure up. Verbal imagery conjuring notions of events from 80 years ago remains commonplace - the exhortations of our current Prime Minister are soaked in those cultural references.
So nothing to do with the topics Cohen raises on 5G and certainly nothing to do with wild XAnon theorires of 5G and Covid-19! A straight smear by Cohen.
If you are wrong you get to infect people, potentially killing some
If you are right....you have deferred your skiing trip for a few months
What you have said here is that your skiing trip is worth more than other peoples lives if you decide to take the gamble you are right.
And then you wonder why people dislike skiers
We have Common Law they have Civil Law.
We have miles.
We drive on the left.
We drive right hand drive vehicles.
I could go on. We are just more different than they are. Nothing either good or wrong with that, it just is what it is.
What happened to the lecturer at Aber you mentioned the other day apropos our Turing discussion ?
He should surely have been dismissed for sexual harassment, but I could not find any mention of such a case anywhere.
(Of course, the traditional way Universities deal with such matters is by writing glowing letters of recommendation, so the harasser ends up as Regius Professor of Modern History somewhere else, or whatever).
Exceptional can be better or it can be worse.
I see no reason to aspire to unexceptionalism though.
The following year, a girl I'd met in Germany become my girlfriend while she was on her Erasmus year in the UK. She later became my wife.
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1343498930072514561?s=20
the whole of Switzerland based on the current assessment of COVID-19 risks.
https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/switzerland
I don’t know what happened to him afterwards.
https://www.lawscot.org.uk/news-and-events/legal-news/campbell-loses-defamation-appeal-in-dugdale-case/
Since removed from Twitter he hasn't been quite so prominent - but he still has devoted followers
https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1258377793827680256?s=20
The reference to "Bath" is his place of residence, as according to some Nats its entirely appropriate for people who live outside Scotland to support independence, its entirely inappropriate if they oppose it. What with them being joyous & civic....
He should write a book...
Which I think was first pointed out by one of all-time my favourite Scottish scientists, the Communist J.B.S Haldane, in "On Being the Right Size".
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13581828/give-one-dose-covid-vaccine-protect-more-brits-experts/
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations.html
Another interesting implication of The Sun story is that the UK only plan to have about 18m vaccinated in the first 5 months (which jibes with the 1m a week vaccinations in the Sunday Torygraph story)
And a clarification:
https://twitter.com/redouad/status/1343545113457401858?s=20
Unlikely.
Every country is exceptional. There is nothing wrong with that, it is only the likes of kinabalu who seem to deign a belief in exceptionalism as a bad thing. I don't know when becoming mundane was meant to be an aspiration.
One benefit that Erasmus brings is the realisation that aspects of life that you thought were uniquely British are actually shared by others, and also the discovery that things you thought were commonplace are actually uniquely British!
You haven't answered why you view anything other than mass conformity as outrageous. What is wrong with not wanting to be mundane?
And the Swiss and the Norwegians do all of those the European way, but never joined the EU.
So I don't think we're exceptional, as opposed to different, and even if we were it wouldn't determine whether we remained in the EU or not.
Rosiest of rose-tinted Panglossian specs on - we should marvel at the commonplace. Didn't realize he was becoming a mystic in his dotage.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319752072_Do_the_Swiss_not_want_to_join_the_European_Union_Swiss_referenda_on_European_integration
If you think the UK is not exceptional then you are saying it is unexceptional - and I would ask you to defend that frame of thought. It certainly isn't mine, why would you consider the UK to be unexceptional?
If you're offshore with a decent Navy, its a good deal less of a problem.
That can't help but shape how people look at life.
Every country should see their own as exceptional. It is a good thing not a bad thing!
I don't frame exceptionalism as a negative or a uniquely British philosophy.
On the one hand they want the public to do what members of staff used to do and use self-service checkouts.
On the other hand, they get their staff to traipse round the store to do your shopping for you and even bring it to your front door.
Only one of these saves the supermarket money. The other is a business model for people who don't run supermarkets.
After all, the EU appears to have made sure that Eire has got what it needed out of the Brexit Deal.
The UK defending the interests of Ulster Unionists... rather less so.
People will be entitled to be upset about it. But I cannot see why it is unreasonable that others are suggesting it is unlikely to outrage many others. As it has been hammered home so hard some people are not just airing a grievance, they think it is a winning tactic politically, when I suspect there are much grander losses a lot more people will miss.
Wonder how that will play out?
But there's also a key difference between the UK, Malta, Cyprus and Ireland.
We had the Navy etc to keep ourselves separated from the island and other threats.
The other islands mentioned didn't have what they needed to keep themselves separated from us.
We have a history of being OK by ourselves. Other nations don't necessarily. A possible reason for us to have more self-confidence on going it alone.
Indeed, I try to marvel at the commonplace every day, especially when walking the dogs - deliberately opening up the senses to experience how wonderful nature truly is. In these COVID days, it puts things in perspective and lightens things up a lot. But then I am truly lucky to have a 75-acre backyard.
https://twitter.com/DUPleader/status/1342132668058783744?s=20
And no, self important rhetoric from politicians doesn't affect that.
https://twitter.com/rosscolquhoun/status/1343355891526078466?s=20
In three of those there are other nations that are also exceptional on those issues. That doesn't stop us from being exceptional too.
There is no monopoly on exceptionalism. Being exceptional is in fact unexceptional, every nation is exceptional.
It was the OP who is obsessed with the UK's exceptionalism which he views as a negative. I do not. Yes we are exceptional. But yes so too are other nations.
https://twitter.com/maxfras/status/1343565752872398848
But by your logic I guess you want to abolish universities?
But- the Brexit Package as a whole is formalities between GB and NI and a Stormont Lock which looks pretty inoperable.
The 2021 arrangements are much closer to the Nationalist vision of Ireland than the Unionist one.
Our British exceptionalism on protecting our population was beginning to get a bit embarrassing.....
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1343563870321967104
Europe is a tiny fraction of the globe. Europeans make up about 7% of all of humanity - why piss about with European "powers"?
Brexit isn't a gamble that the EU will never become a real power - it is moving on from power struggles of the past and the UK moving on as a self-assured grown up independent nation on the global not local stage.
I'd hope that with Turing the government does something that's a little better than Erasmus. It'd be a poor show if they didn't given the great name they've associated with the scheme.
The Trade Deal is the beginning of the definition of our future relationship with the European Union. There's much it covers and much that will evolve over time. I'm warming to it slowly though I'm not keen on the triumphalism of the pro-Johnson supporters.
I've never wanted the EU to fail nor to be in an unnecessarily adversarial relationship. I don't think many do but there's an undercurrent - we're outside now and the EU members must be allowed to evolve the organisation as they see fit.
I'm cautiously optimistic the political climate will also improve and in time all thoughts of re-joining will be set aside in favour of periodic re-negotiation to the Trade Deal to increase our alignment with the EU.