Now this is proper big news. The likely new leader of the free world. Who in 1950 would have thought Germany would hold that position in 2020? The times they are a changing, no question about it. On which topic I like the Header and especially the title - Europe's Last American. It's fading fast, the sense of kinship between us and the USA. I can vouch for this personally. I used to feel it, even quite recently, but now I don't. I remain fascinated by America but I look upon it as a strange and exotic land. Much of this is because of Trump but not all of it.
Germany's leader is not the leader of the free world. Biden will be from Wednesday.
Germany is not big enough, the EU might be but does not have the will
Well I look to Berlin not Washington these days for a steer on how I as a citizen of the free world should go about my business.
And while I have you, let's just knock our bet on the head. £25 to a Good Cause. I give you 3 options. Mermaids. Jeremy Corbyn's new Peace & Fellowship project. Or the National Trust.
No receipt required. I trust you 100%.
I will make a payment to the NT
Toby Young said we all had to ragequit the NT. Based patriots complied.
Yes, apparently explaining the history of their properties was a crime against British history, or something.
It’s not always a simple as that. A good friend of mine’s cousin was a very private man. His family knew he was gay but he wanted that kept quiet both because it was personal (and because it was illegal at the time).
The national trust chose to make it public without consulting his family which caused a great deal of upset
They have developed a proven track record of breaking covenants - no not just allowing fox-hunting on their land.
A legal friend was involved in one case. A property had been deeded to the National Trust. The NT wanted to break the agreement they had signed with the family in question. The NT argument to the court consisted, essentially, of "We are the National Trust, therefore legal agreements should be varied for us,. Because we want to."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
You need to have a word sharpish with @HYUFD. He's giving them £25 tomorrow to settle our bet but perhaps he could attach a "no wokerie" rider. Insist it goes on unusual but delicious jams for the cafes.
Well, we don't always agree. I don't agree with him on sending tanks into Scotland, for example.
My view isn't a outlandish view. They've been criticised by dozens of Conservative MPs, the Culture Secretary, several eminent historians and even through an editorial in The Times. So far they've been entirely unrepentant and seem to view such criticism as evidence that "the problem" is bigger than they thought, so they should double-down. This latest thing about getting a left-wing academic to indoctrinate children through the colonial countryside project, who then preach back to volunteers and staff, is something Pol Pot could have thought up.
I have written to Hilary McGrady about it, politely, explaining my reasons for cancelling my membership and why I won't donate or re-join until it recognises where it's going wrong.
She's perfectly entitled to ignore me, of course. And I am entitled to withhold my money and support.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
Exactly. It will polarise. Left-wingers will join, and right-wingers will abstain or leave. Thus, it becomes a politicised charity and not one holding our nation's heritage in trust for us all.
Now this is proper big news. The likely new leader of the free world. Who in 1950 would have thought Germany would hold that position in 2020? The times they are a changing, no question about it. On which topic I like the Header and especially the title - Europe's Last American. It's fading fast, the sense of kinship between us and the USA. I can vouch for this personally. I used to feel it, even quite recently, but now I don't. I remain fascinated by America but I look upon it as a strange and exotic land. Much of this is because of Trump but not all of it.
Germany's leader is not the leader of the free world. Biden will be from Wednesday.
Germany is not big enough, the EU might be but does not have the will
Well I look to Berlin not Washington these days for a steer on how I as a citizen of the free world should go about my business.
And while I have you, let's just knock our bet on the head. £25 to a Good Cause. I give you 3 options. Mermaids. Jeremy Corbyn's new Peace & Fellowship project. Or the National Trust.
No receipt required. I trust you 100%.
I will make a payment to the NT
Toby Young said we all had to ragequit the NT. Based patriots complied.
Yes, apparently explaining the history of their properties was a crime against British history, or something.
It’s not always a simple as that. A good friend of mine’s cousin was a very private man. His family knew he was gay but he wanted that kept quiet both because it was personal (and because it was illegal at the time).
The national trust chose to make it public without consulting his family which caused a great deal of upset
They have developed a proven track record of breaking covenants - no not just allowing fox-hunting on their land.
A legal friend was involved in one case. A property had been deeded to the National Trust. The NT wanted to break the agreement they had signed with the family in question. The NT argument to the court consisted, essentially, of "We are the National Trust, therefore legal agreements should be varied for us,. Because we want to."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
You need to have a word sharpish with @HYUFD. He's giving them £25 tomorrow to settle our bet but perhaps he could attach a "no wokerie" rider. Insist it goes on unusual but delicious jams for the cafes.
Well, we don't always agree. I don't agree with him on sending tanks into Scotland, for example.
My view isn't a outlandish view. They've been criticised by dozens of Conservative MPs, the Culture Secretary, several eminent historians and even through an editorial in The Times. So far they've been entirely unrepentant and seem to view such criticism as evidence that "the problem" is bigger than they thought, so they should double-down. This latest thing about getting a left-wing academic to indoctrinate children through the colonial countryside project, who then preach back to volunteers and staff, is something Pol Pot could have thought up.
I have written to Hilary McGrady about it, politely, explaining my reasons for cancelling my membership and why I won't donate or re-join until it recognises where it's going wrong.
She's perfectly entitled to ignore me, of course. And I am entitled to withhold my money and support.
Given the number of people who will have completely cancelled their membership having not been able to use it I suspect your complaint will be lost in the panic of just trying to keep members.
Whoever came up with the idea of using cathedrals as vaccination centres deserves a gong.
"Salisbury Cathedral has been transformed into a vaccination centre with an RAF veteran being one of the first to receive the Covid-19 jab. Former Flight Sergeant Louis Godwin, 95, gave a thumbs-up after being vaccinated in the cathedral, which dates back more than 800 years. "I was so pleased to get it, especially in a setting like this," he said. Organisers were aiming to vaccinate 1,000 people aged over 80 with the Pfizer/BioNTech jab on Saturday."
Now this is proper big news. The likely new leader of the free world. Who in 1950 would have thought Germany would hold that position in 2020? The times they are a changing, no question about it. On which topic I like the Header and especially the title - Europe's Last American. It's fading fast, the sense of kinship between us and the USA. I can vouch for this personally. I used to feel it, even quite recently, but now I don't. I remain fascinated by America but I look upon it as a strange and exotic land. Much of this is because of Trump but not all of it.
Germany's leader is not the leader of the free world. Biden will be from Wednesday.
Germany is not big enough, the EU might be but does not have the will
Well I look to Berlin not Washington these days for a steer on how I as a citizen of the free world should go about my business.
And while I have you, let's just knock our bet on the head. £25 to a Good Cause. I give you 3 options. Mermaids. Jeremy Corbyn's new Peace & Fellowship project. Or the National Trust.
No receipt required. I trust you 100%.
I will make a payment to the NT
Toby Young said we all had to ragequit the NT. Based patriots complied.
Yes, apparently explaining the history of their properties was a crime against British history, or something.
It’s not always a simple as that. A good friend of mine’s cousin was a very private man. His family knew he was gay but he wanted that kept quiet both because it was personal (and because it was illegal at the time).
The national trust chose to make it public without consulting his family which caused a great deal of upset
They have developed a proven track record of breaking covenants - no not just allowing fox-hunting on their land.
A legal friend was involved in one case. A property had been deeded to the National Trust. The NT wanted to break the agreement they had signed with the family in question. The NT argument to the court consisted, essentially, of "We are the National Trust, therefore legal agreements should be varied for us,. Because we want to."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
You need to have a word sharpish with @HYUFD. He's giving them £25 tomorrow to settle our bet but perhaps he could attach a "no wokerie" rider. Insist it goes on unusual but delicious jams for the cafes.
Well, we don't always agree. I don't agree with him on sending tanks into Scotland, for example.
My view isn't a outlandish view. They've been criticised by dozens of Conservative MPs, the Culture Secretary, several eminent historians and even through an editorial in The Times. So far they've been entirely unrepentant and seem to view such criticism as evidence that "the problem" is bigger than they thought, so they should double-down. This latest thing about getting a left-wing academic to indoctrinate children through the colonial countryside project, who then preach back to volunteers and staff, is something Pol Pot could have thought up.
I have written to Hilary McGrady about it, politely, explaining my reasons for cancelling my membership and why I won't donate or re-join until it recognises where it's going wrong.
She's perfectly entitled to ignore me, of course. And I am entitled to withhold my money and support.
Excellent. To adapt the apocryphal quotation, 'Be the lack of change you wish to see in the world'
Now this is proper big news. The likely new leader of the free world. Who in 1950 would have thought Germany would hold that position in 2020? The times they are a changing, no question about it. On which topic I like the Header and especially the title - Europe's Last American. It's fading fast, the sense of kinship between us and the USA. I can vouch for this personally. I used to feel it, even quite recently, but now I don't. I remain fascinated by America but I look upon it as a strange and exotic land. Much of this is because of Trump but not all of it.
Germany's leader is not the leader of the free world. Biden will be from Wednesday.
Germany is not big enough, the EU might be but does not have the will
Well I look to Berlin not Washington these days for a steer on how I as a citizen of the free world should go about my business.
And while I have you, let's just knock our bet on the head. £25 to a Good Cause. I give you 3 options. Mermaids. Jeremy Corbyn's new Peace & Fellowship project. Or the National Trust.
No receipt required. I trust you 100%.
I will make a payment to the NT
Toby Young said we all had to ragequit the NT. Based patriots complied.
Yes, apparently explaining the history of their properties was a crime against British history, or something.
It’s not always a simple as that. A good friend of mine’s cousin was a very private man. His family knew he was gay but he wanted that kept quiet both because it was personal (and because it was illegal at the time).
The national trust chose to make it public without consulting his family which caused a great deal of upset
They have developed a proven track record of breaking covenants - no not just allowing fox-hunting on their land.
A legal friend was involved in one case. A property had been deeded to the National Trust. The NT wanted to break the agreement they had signed with the family in question. The NT argument to the court consisted, essentially, of "We are the National Trust, therefore legal agreements should be varied for us,. Because we want to."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Reined in. Please.
The funniest bit in the case I mentioned was that the NT, when they lost, asked the judge to make the proceedings secret. Their reasoning was their (failed) attempt at breaking a covenant would damage their reputation and make people less likely to deed properties to them.
The cherry on top was an additional argument - that reporting of the case might cause donors to create more onerous and binding conditions in the covenants.
I've seen stupider arguments in court - many of them from Her Majesty's Government. Such as Suella Braverman QC's...erm...brave argument that a trial judge was in the wrong because not only was he entitled to depart from a sentencing guideline but he was positively required to do so. Takes all sorts.
My legal friend said that the Judge in question - it was some kind of dispute hearing, just the judge - was well known for sticking to formal behaviour. In the face of this, he became... not sarcastic, but some of the legal precedents he mentioned were in that direction, apparently.
Apparently the RSPCA is the all time champion of bizarre law bending (and breaking) in the charity sector, but the NT is trying very hard to get in there.
The employee in one of my first ever employment tribunals (this was in 2002) calmly informed the judge that her 28 year old line manager personally imprisoned her father during the Mau Mau uprising in about 1959.
Magnificent. What was the reaction of the judge?
He felt she had some psychiatric issues. Her counsel by this point agreed.
Shortly after that I defended the same client against a sales manager claiming unfair dismissal and sisability discrimination fired because he flew to Hong Kong while claiming to be off sick with a very bad back. When he was caught bang to rights in HK he called his GP in SW London who agreed to amend the sick note to include a further diagnosis of "stress at work". Problem was we had both notes. The employee also claimed in his statement that his HK acupuncturist was the only person who could relieve the bad back. When I put it to him that 14 hours in a plane would not be of much assistance to such a condition he said he got "upgraded".
I was peripherally involved in a case with a former employer. An employee left, and sued for reason X.
When clearing out her desk, it turned out that they had left papers behind. These included copies of settlements for suing for X against previous employers. And detailed notes on how fabricating the evidence for this claim was going, referencing the fabrications for the previous lawsuits.
Employment Tribunals are getting very tough about that. Normally in an ET you are not awarded your costs if you win but a few months back a hotel in London got a costs award of (from memory) roughly £350,000 against their former employee because he had secretly recorded dozens of hours of conversations with his colleagues in order to implicate them in a harassment claim. A record costs award from a Tribunal against an employee IIRC. Doubt they will see much of it but still.
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
Exactly. It will polarise. Left-wingers will join, and right-wingers will abstain or leave. Thus, it becomes a politicised charity and not one holding our nation's heritage in trust for us all.
Who does that benefit, I wonder?
So left wing people should not join the National Trust because it will become polarised as a result. If it remains a preserve of the right all will be harmoneous. Is that correct? What shade of opinion is the limit to join the NT. Are lapsed LibDems like myself okay?
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
The problem is that the HQ is attracting people of a certain type. They appear, from the behaviour, to have previously worked at Trafigura. I suggest checking out their behaviour towards tenant farmers on their properties. Landlordism of a kind that has almost an Irish flavour to it.
To some extent, yes, this is simply a function of the sort of people who now seek a tertiary education in history and heritage, and want to make a career of that in the third sector; they are very middle-class, well-off, overwhelmingly white and very very Woke. So, they're becoming like (arguably worse) than the Church of England, with a massive gap between HQ staff and volunteers/visitors, as the CoE has between clergy and congregation.
If one doesn't believe me try selecting just a few of the leading NT staff at random and checking their Twitter feeds or LinkedIn profiles. You'll see they (together with those at the British Museum etc.) all have similar backgrounds, know each other, have worked together in the past, largely share similar political views and support each other in Twitter spats online.
They assume the answer is crud like whitewashing and colonialism in the past etc. and therefore the solution must be Wokery. They thus alienate and insult the intelligence of their existing base, whilst patronising and condescending minorities they seek to attract. Meanwhile, they mutually reinforce each others intrinsic rightness at HQ through this criticism as just further evidence of the British public's latent racism and bigotry.
It's all bollocks. It won't end until they get some genuine (political and social) diversity in the boardroom, and they feel it in the pocket to make the point.
Whoever came up with the idea of using cathedrals as vaccination centres deserves a gong.
"Salisbury Cathedral has been transformed into a vaccination centre with an RAF veteran being one of the first to receive the Covid-19 jab. Former Flight Sergeant Louis Godwin, 95, gave a thumbs-up after being vaccinated in the cathedral, which dates back more than 800 years. "I was so pleased to get it, especially in a setting like this," he said. Organisers were aiming to vaccinate 1,000 people aged over 80 with the Pfizer/BioNTech jab on Saturday."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
The problem is that the HQ is attracting people of a certain type. They appear, from the behaviour, to have previously worked at Trafigura. I suggest checking out their behaviour towards tenant farmers on their properties. Landlordism of a kind that has almost an Irish flavour to it.
To some extent, yes, this is simply a function of the sort of people who now seek a tertiary education in history and heritage, and want to make a career of that in the third sector; they are very middle-class, well-off, overwhelmingly white and very very Woke. So, they're becoming like (arguably worse) than the Church of England, with a massive gap between HQ staff and volunteers/visitors, as the CoE has between clergy and congregation.
If one doesn't believe me try selecting just a few of the leading NT staff at random and checking their Twitter feeds or LinkedIn profiles. You'll see they (together with those at the British Museum etc.) all have similar backgrounds, know each other, have worked together in the past, largely share similar political views and support each other in Twitter spats online.
They assume the answer is crud like whitewashing and colonialism in the past etc. and therefore the solution must be Wokery. They thus alienate and insult the intelligence of their existing base, whilst patronising and condescending minorities they seek to attract. Meanwhile, they mutually reinforce each others intrinsic rightness at HQ through this criticism as just further evidence of the British public's latent racism and bigotry.
It's all bollocks. It won't end until they get some genuine (political and social) diversity in the boardroom, and they feel it in the pocket to make the point.
Actually, I don't think they are left wing. They are wearing certain attitudes in the way that the bug in Men In Black II wore people suits.
They just want to get ahead. In the style of the trader at Goldman Sachs who commented he was off to Belgium to sell CDS to widows and orphans.
Kicking tenant farmers off their land and then saying "try and enforce your lease - we will just spend on lawyers until you go broke" - that's not very progressive, is it?
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
The problem is that the HQ is attracting people of a certain type. They appear, from the behaviour, to have previously worked at Trafigura. I suggest checking out their behaviour towards tenant farmers on their properties. Landlordism of a kind that has almost an Irish flavour to it.
To some extent, yes, this is simply a function of the sort of people who now seek a tertiary education in history and heritage, and want to make a career of that in the third sector; they are very middle-class, well-off, overwhelmingly white and very very Woke. So, they're becoming like (arguably worse) than the Church of England, with a massive gap between HQ staff and volunteers/visitors, as the CoE has between clergy and congregation.
If one doesn't believe me try selecting just a few of the leading NT staff at random and checking their Twitter feeds or LinkedIn profiles. You'll see they (together with those at the British Museum etc.) all have similar backgrounds, know each other, have worked together in the past, largely share similar political views and support each other in Twitter spats online.
They assume the answer is crud like whitewashing and colonialism in the past etc. and therefore the solution must be Wokery. They thus alienate and insult the intelligence of their existing base, whilst patronising and condescending minorities they seek to attract. Meanwhile, they mutually reinforce each others intrinsic rightness at HQ through this criticism as just further evidence of the British public's latent racism and bigotry.
It's all bollocks. It won't end until they get some genuine (political and social) diversity in the boardroom, and they feel it in the pocket to make the point.
Of course the museum and heritage crowd all know each other. Just like the music crowd or the architecture crowd or indeed any other crowd you care to think of. Nothing sinister or unusual about that.
National Trust moves with the times; right-wing Tories gnash their teeth.
Anything else happening?
My mum always refused to visit National Trust properties on the grounds that a lot of them became National Trust properties due to Labour's introduction of massive death duties.
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
I had that one when someone claimed he was withdrawing money from an account he shouldn't have been in order to "provoke mirror transactions". I still have no idea what that meant.
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
Ah yes. Many moons ago, at the start of my career, an office politician was trying to get me. So he arranged an audit of my expenses. Which found the company owed me money.
I was going WTF?
My boss, who was wise in the ways of arseholes, smiled. And said "we have him now"...
Yes, said office politician had committed all the expense frauds you could think of. The set of cab receipts, over a number of years, written on the same printed receipt pad, with identical handwriting.... All the classics were there....
The total they announce today is from yesterday. But hopefully today's figures will be a bit higher.
I wouldn't be surprised if the weekends saw a little dip, but generally every day should be higher as more vaccine doses are secured and we get better at distribution.
The data from Israel is also looking encouraging. It appears that it takes around two weeks from vaccination to have an impact, but the rates of infection of those vaccinated drops around 60% relative to other groups after two weeks (and just a single shot).
It was a 33% reduction in the elderly population according to the Israeli data the other day. The 60% figure was including the younger population, such as health workers.
"Graphs diverge on day 14 with a 33% decline among the vaccinated elderly, without a similar trend among the unvaccinated,” he said. He added that more information would be forthcoming from more detailed peer-reviewed studies currently underway."
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
I had that one when someone claimed he was withdrawing money from an account he shouldn't have been in order to "provoke mirror transactions". I still have no idea what that meant.
It is genuinely mystifying, in about 50% of the cases I've investigated, the people guilty of these things earn six figure salaries, and most of them have no debts to service.
Sometimes it might be a slight caused by not getting a pay increase or sometimes they do it for the thrill.
If it wasn't my job I'd do it for free. It was my absolute pleasure to crush a white nationalist insurrection. I'm glad I was in a position to help. We'll do it as many times as it takes
Up there with "Thank you [for saving my life], but fuck you for being there"
Even Matt Hancock IGNORES Boris Johnson's pleas to 'stay home this weekend' as he is filmed in park - as crowds flock to beauty spots, supermarket shoppers refuse to wear masks and anti-lockdown protesters are arrested
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
The problem is that the HQ is attracting people of a certain type. They appear, from the behaviour, to have previously worked at Trafigura. I suggest checking out their behaviour towards tenant farmers on their properties. Landlordism of a kind that has almost an Irish flavour to it.
To some extent, yes, this is simply a function of the sort of people who now seek a tertiary education in history and heritage, and want to make a career of that in the third sector; they are very middle-class, well-off, overwhelmingly white and very very Woke. So, they're becoming like (arguably worse) than the Church of England, with a massive gap between HQ staff and volunteers/visitors, as the CoE has between clergy and congregation.
If one doesn't believe me try selecting just a few of the leading NT staff at random and checking their Twitter feeds or LinkedIn profiles. You'll see they (together with those at the British Museum etc.) all have similar backgrounds, know each other, have worked together in the past, largely share similar political views and support each other in Twitter spats online.
They assume the answer is crud like whitewashing and colonialism in the past etc. and therefore the solution must be Wokery. They thus alienate and insult the intelligence of their existing base, whilst patronising and condescending minorities they seek to attract. Meanwhile, they mutually reinforce each others intrinsic rightness at HQ through this criticism as just further evidence of the British public's latent racism and bigotry.
It's all bollocks. It won't end until they get some genuine (political and social) diversity in the boardroom, and they feel it in the pocket to make the point.
Actually, I don't think they are left wing. They are wearing certain attitudes in the way that the bug in Men In Black II wore people suits.
They just want to get ahead. In the style of the trader at Goldman Sachs who commented he was off to Belgium to sell CDS to widows and orphans.
Kicking tenant farmers off their land and then saying "try and enforce your lease - we will just spend on lawyers until you go broke" - that's not very progressive, is it?
Yes, suppose it depends on your take of what left-wing means.
My view is that the definition of high taxation and economic redistribution, alone, for left-wing is outmoded. There is arguably an even more important vector these days of cultural Marxism, which is more insidious, and that's the fulcrum for my definition these days as it represents the clearer political dividing line.
It's entirely hypocritical on the former count too, though, too as you suggest.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
Exactly. It will polarise. Left-wingers will join, and right-wingers will abstain or leave. Thus, it becomes a politicised charity and not one holding our nation's heritage in trust for us all.
Who does that benefit, I wonder?
So left wing people should not join the National Trust because it will become polarised as a result. If it remains a preserve of the right all will be harmoneous. Is that correct? What shade of opinion is the limit to join the NT. Are lapsed LibDems like myself okay?
Even Matt Hancock IGNORES Boris Johnson's pleas to 'stay home this weekend' as he is filmed in park - as crowds flock to beauty spots, supermarket shoppers refuse to wear masks and anti-lockdown protesters are arrested
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
Ah yes. Many moons ago, at the start of my career, an office politician was trying to get me. So he arranged an audit of my expenses. Which found the company owed me money.
I was going WTF?
My boss, who was wise in the ways of arseholes, smiled. And said "we have him now"...
Yes, said office politician had committed all the expense frauds you could think of. The set of cab receipts, over a number of years, written on the same printed receipt pad, with identical handwriting.... All the classics were there....
Not expenses but I was once asked to defend a bloke who texted a picture of his excited genitalia to his boss' secretary. This would have been in about 2005 - in the earliest days of picture messaging. I asked him why he did it and he said "I dialled the wrong number". I pointed out that, given that UK phone numbers are 11 digits long and all start with '07' there was crudely a 1 in 100,000,000 chance of him typing in the exact remaining digits that would direct the offending image of his manhood to that specific individual. "But they can't prove it wasn't a wrong number" he said.
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
Ah yes. Many moons ago, at the start of my career, an office politician was trying to get me. So he arranged an audit of my expenses. Which found the company owed me money.
I was going WTF?
My boss, who was wise in the ways of arseholes, smiled. And said "we have him now"...
Yes, said office politician had committed all the expense frauds you could think of. The set of cab receipts, over a number of years, written on the same printed receipt pad, with identical handwriting.... All the classics were there....
Not expenses but I was once asked to defend a bloke who texted a picture of his excited genitalia to his boss' secretary. This would have been in about 2005 - in the earliest days of picture messaging. I asked him why he did it and he said "I dialled the wrong number". I pointed out that, given that UK phone numbers are 11 digits long and all start with '07' there was crudely a 1 in 100,000,000 chance of him typing in the exact remaining digits that would direct the offending image of his manhood to that specific individual. "But they can't prove it wasn't a wrong number" he said.
I mentioned on here a few weeks ago that I had to investigate an employee sending those sorts of pics and videos to a woman who didn't feel the same way about him.
I still have nightmares about that, the cataloguing of the evidence took some effort.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
The problem is that the HQ is attracting people of a certain type. They appear, from the behaviour, to have previously worked at Trafigura. I suggest checking out their behaviour towards tenant farmers on their properties. Landlordism of a kind that has almost an Irish flavour to it.
To some extent, yes, this is simply a function of the sort of people who now seek a tertiary education in history and heritage, and want to make a career of that in the third sector; they are very middle-class, well-off, overwhelmingly white and very very Woke. So, they're becoming like (arguably worse) than the Church of England, with a massive gap between HQ staff and volunteers/visitors, as the CoE has between clergy and congregation.
If one doesn't believe me try selecting just a few of the leading NT staff at random and checking their Twitter feeds or LinkedIn profiles. You'll see they (together with those at the British Museum etc.) all have similar backgrounds, know each other, have worked together in the past, largely share similar political views and support each other in Twitter spats online.
They assume the answer is crud like whitewashing and colonialism in the past etc. and therefore the solution must be Wokery. They thus alienate and insult the intelligence of their existing base, whilst patronising and condescending minorities they seek to attract. Meanwhile, they mutually reinforce each others intrinsic rightness at HQ through this criticism as just further evidence of the British public's latent racism and bigotry.
It's all bollocks. It won't end until they get some genuine (political and social) diversity in the boardroom, and they feel it in the pocket to make the point.
Actually, I don't think they are left wing. They are wearing certain attitudes in the way that the bug in Men In Black II wore people suits.
They just want to get ahead. In the style of the trader at Goldman Sachs who commented he was off to Belgium to sell CDS to widows and orphans.
Kicking tenant farmers off their land and then saying "try and enforce your lease - we will just spend on lawyers until you go broke" - that's not very progressive, is it?
Yes, suppose it depends on your take of what left-wing means.
My view is that the definition of high taxation and economic redistribution, alone, for left-wing is outmoded. There is arguably an even more important vector these days of cultural Marxism, which is more insidious, and that's the fulcrum for my definition these days as it represents the clearer political dividing line.
It's entirely hypocritical on the former count too, though, too as you suggest.
I don't seem any real progressive instincts in many of the charities. Or much charity.
Writing up a manager of charity shop for poor performance - because she didn't get enough volunteers in, so that they couldn't send home the paid staff who had been allocated hours... I am to the right of Ghengis Khan etc. but that is completely Scrooge McDuck stuff....
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
Of course the people staffing the properties are; but too many of their bosses are typical anti-nationalists. Charles Moore gently thunders on the topic here:
On the contrary, part of what seems to have pricked Moore's thumb in that article is the criticism of Churchill and Curzon's "antinationalism". Particularly amusing the writer wailing about contested terms like "colonialism" (well that's a woke criticism if ever I saw one) whilst slipping into pejorative terms like "hit list" and bemoaning the fact someone had the temerity to comment about the British monarchy's silence about its chequered past.
I am a member of the NT, and this criticism reads more like the hurt feelings of someone who's stumbled upon the idea that some people see a benefit in reassessing our country's past and emphasising that not everything was good. And God knows, someone needs to say it. I think I'll be keeping my NT membership.
Not a bad idea from their perspective and from hers.
Trump still won Florida with 51% of the vote last November so it remains very much Trump country as well as being the home of Mar a Lago
51% of the vote does not put anything "very much" in anyone's camp.
Absolutely. Plus the victory in no small part was aided by the hispanic community backing Trump/rejecting the Democrats after a very negative campaign suggesting the far-left could implement Cuban policies if elected.
The idea that the hispanic community would "very much" back Ivanka over Rubio is a brave but entirely unsubstantiated suggestion.
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
Ah yes. Many moons ago, at the start of my career, an office politician was trying to get me. So he arranged an audit of my expenses. Which found the company owed me money.
I was going WTF?
My boss, who was wise in the ways of arseholes, smiled. And said "we have him now"...
Yes, said office politician had committed all the expense frauds you could think of. The set of cab receipts, over a number of years, written on the same printed receipt pad, with identical handwriting.... All the classics were there....
Not expenses but I was once asked to defend a bloke who texted a picture of his excited genitalia to his boss' secretary. This would have been in about 2005 - in the earliest days of picture messaging. I asked him why he did it and he said "I dialled the wrong number". I pointed out that, given that UK phone numbers are 11 digits long and all start with '07' there was crudely a 1 in 100,000,000 chance of him typing in the exact remaining digits that would direct the offending image of his manhood to that specific individual. "But they can't prove it wasn't a wrong number" he said.
I mentioned on here a few weeks ago that I had to investigate an employee sending those sorts of pics and videos to a woman who didn't feel the same way about him.
I still have nightmares about that, the cataloguing of the evidence took some effort.
I have in the past had to do such things a lot in harassment cases but less so now. In the early days of social media and smartphones that sort of case was rampant but I think as people have got used to the technology and potential repecussions and have got a bit smarter. Or perhaps just not instructing me. Who can tell.
OT - interesting thred, but think Pip (aka Quincel) may be wrong about one key factor.
Namely, the assertion that "Republicans have little chance in the general". When in fact some of the most famous - and occasionally successful - mayors in the history of New York City have in fact been elected (at least for starters) as Republicans.
> Michael Bloomberg, who IIRC changed his registration from Democratic to Republican before he entered his 1st mayors race. Why? Because he knew that he stood VERY little chance of winning the Democratic nomination, given the byzantine nature of NYC Democratic politics. SO instead, he ran as a Republican - and won.
> Rudolph Giuliani was always a Republican (before he morphed into a Nazi) and while he lost his first race for mayor (to Democrat David Dinkins) in a close race, he won the rematch four years later.
> John Lindsay did much the same thing to first win election as Mayor. Then, when he ran for re-election and lost the GOP nomination (to a conservative) he was the standard bearer for the Liberal Party, and won again.
> Fiorello La Guardia is the most famous example, and also the greatest mayor in the history of New York City, was a progressive Republican, not because of his love of the GOP but because of his hatred for Tammy Hall which dominated NYC Democratic politics. So he ran as a Republican AND as an Independent "Fusion" candidate - and won, then went on to be re-elected twice the same way.
SO while it may seem that the Republican nomination SHOULD be worthless in New York CIty, based on partisan voting patters from the White House to the state house, this is NOT always the case.
Of course Democrat Bill De Blasio broke the pattern. But given that HE could not get himself elected dogcatcher this decade let alone mayor (even IF he wasn't precluded from running this year by term limit).
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
Exactly. It will polarise. Left-wingers will join, and right-wingers will abstain or leave. Thus, it becomes a politicised charity and not one holding our nation's heritage in trust for us all.
Who does that benefit, I wonder?
So left wing people should not join the National Trust because it will become polarised as a result. If it remains a preserve of the right all will be harmoneous. Is that correct? What shade of opinion is the limit to join the NT. Are lapsed LibDems like myself okay?
It should be apolitical.
This isn't difficult.
It should not be party political. But no national organisation on the scale of the National Trust can be apolitical - any major decision involving its properties is political to some extent -planning, access, charges etc etc.
National Trust moves with the times; right-wing Tories gnash their teeth.
Anything else happening?
Yes, attitudes like yours and comments like that are the problem.
I don't agree.
To portray the elite of society as more benevolent than they really were is right-wing propaganda in itself. That is the real problem.
It's actually quite relevant to know where the money came from to build great estate X and big house Y. Or are we supposed to think they won the pools or something? And that the landowners were necessarily benevolent?
Near where I live, the big houses were built in part on laws passed by the elite which doomed local people to serfdom - slavery, we would call it - as hereditary miners and salters passed like property - indeed sometimes sold as property - from laird to laird.
It doesn't stop me from being a member of the National Trust for Scotland (which to their credit is considering the issue of slavery in all senses and wealth that came from it) and I wouldn't dream of knocking anything down or burning any paintings. But there is a history that we all must inquire into, and remember and contemplate for the good and the bad, in our forebears' senses and ours.
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
Ah yes. Many moons ago, at the start of my career, an office politician was trying to get me. So he arranged an audit of my expenses. Which found the company owed me money.
I was going WTF?
My boss, who was wise in the ways of arseholes, smiled. And said "we have him now"...
Yes, said office politician had committed all the expense frauds you could think of. The set of cab receipts, over a number of years, written on the same printed receipt pad, with identical handwriting.... All the classics were there....
Not expenses but I was once asked to defend a bloke who texted a picture of his excited genitalia to his boss' secretary. This would have been in about 2005 - in the earliest days of picture messaging. I asked him why he did it and he said "I dialled the wrong number". I pointed out that, given that UK phone numbers are 11 digits long and all start with '07' there was crudely a 1 in 100,000,000 chance of him typing in the exact remaining digits that would direct the offending image of his manhood to that specific individual. "But they can't prove it wasn't a wrong number" he said.
I mentioned on here a few weeks ago that I had to investigate an employee sending those sorts of pics and videos to a woman who didn't feel the same way about him.
I still have nightmares about that, the cataloguing of the evidence took some effort.
I have in the past had to do such things a lot in harassment cases but less so now. In the early days of social media and smartphones that sort of case was rampant but I think as people have got used to the technology and potential repecussions and have got a bit smarter. Or perhaps just not instructing me. Who can tell.
It is getting worse.
People find out the hard (fnarr) way that it is possible to record facetime calls.
IN other words, breaching the constitution of the UK.
The opposite, the constitution of the UK is based on the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament at Westminster.
It is about time the UK government started directing more funds to Scotland itself rather than letting the Nationalists use them to push their Nat agenda to break up the UK
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
Ah yes. Many moons ago, at the start of my career, an office politician was trying to get me. So he arranged an audit of my expenses. Which found the company owed me money.
I was going WTF?
My boss, who was wise in the ways of arseholes, smiled. And said "we have him now"...
Yes, said office politician had committed all the expense frauds you could think of. The set of cab receipts, over a number of years, written on the same printed receipt pad, with identical handwriting.... All the classics were there....
Not expenses but I was once asked to defend a bloke who texted a picture of his excited genitalia to his boss' secretary. This would have been in about 2005 - in the earliest days of picture messaging. I asked him why he did it and he said "I dialled the wrong number". I pointed out that, given that UK phone numbers are 11 digits long and all start with '07' there was crudely a 1 in 100,000,000 chance of him typing in the exact remaining digits that would direct the offending image of his manhood to that specific individual. "But they can't prove it wasn't a wrong number" he said.
A friend served on a jury.
Apparently, a chap was sitting on a stolen motorcycle he had bought un-knowingly from a bloke in pub. He was outside a jewellery shop. There was a bit of a commotion and a man he had never seen before in his life ran out of the shop, dressed in motorcycling gear. And jumped on the back of the bike. And shouted "Go Go". So he did the obvious thing, and floored it. After a high speed crash in a police chase, he did the obvious thing and...... carried on trying to run away.
After the verdict, the jury were given some facts that had previously been considered prejudicial.
Apparently the two gentlemen did know each other. They had recently been released from prison. Having served their sentences for a previous effort. A jewellery store robbery that failed. After the driver crashed the motorcycle, in the get away....
IN other words, breaching the constitution of the UK.
The opposite, the constitution of the UK is based on the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament at Westminster.
It is about time the UK government started directing more funds to Scotland itself rather than letting the Nationalists use them to push their Nat agenda to break up the UK
Your unwritten constitution included the Sewell convention, whcih makes such actions illegal in devolved areas without the permission of the Scottish Parliament. Much was made of it by the unionists. Turns out because it's only an unwritten convention when it comes to actually looking at the law, it is meanijngless, and can be ignored.
That is your precious unwritten constitution and that is how precious useless it is.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Not cancel them, though. But to get such a politicised organisation to actually listen you need to hit them where it hurts.
The wallet.
I suspect that cancelling NT membership because they have the wrong type of history is very much a minority pursuit.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
Of course the people staffing the properties are; but too many of their bosses are typical anti-nationalists. Charles Moore gently thunders on the topic here:
On the contrary, part of what seems to have pricked Moore's thumb in that article is the criticism of Churchill and Curzon's "antinationalism". Particularly amusing the writer wailing about contested terms like "colonialism" (well that's a woke criticism if ever I saw one) whilst slipping into pejorative terms like "hit list" and bemoaning the fact someone had the temerity to comment about the British monarchy's silence about its chequered past.
I am a member of the NT, and this criticism reads more like the hurt feelings of someone who's stumbled upon the idea that some people see a benefit in reassessing our country's past and emphasising that not everything was good. And God knows, someone needs to say it. I think I'll be keeping my NT membership.
I would say that being an anti-nationalist is a VERY good thing. Nationalism is a poisonous creed in all it's forms. It is divisive, often racist and appeals to the lowest common denominator of human nastiness. It is fundamentally different to patriotism. There is no harm in being patriotic, which while often naive and obviously biased, is normally a positive thing.
With respect to the NT, it does a reasonably good job. It is a little too PC in many ways IMO and it's PC agenda in airbrushing out the contribution made to country estates by country sports (so as not to offend the easily offended) is irritating to some of us who like to see proper unbiased historical accounts. But on the whole it does a prgood job as guardian of some of our most famous estates.
I never cease to be amazed at the ingenious stupidity a certain kind of criminal/fraudster puts into their work.
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
My favourites are the ones who say they were merely testing the internal checks &balances/security processes of the company.
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
Ah yes. Many moons ago, at the start of my career, an office politician was trying to get me. So he arranged an audit of my expenses. Which found the company owed me money.
I was going WTF?
My boss, who was wise in the ways of arseholes, smiled. And said "we have him now"...
Yes, said office politician had committed all the expense frauds you could think of. The set of cab receipts, over a number of years, written on the same printed receipt pad, with identical handwriting.... All the classics were there....
Not expenses but I was once asked to defend a bloke who texted a picture of his excited genitalia to his boss' secretary. This would have been in about 2005 - in the earliest days of picture messaging. I asked him why he did it and he said "I dialled the wrong number". I pointed out that, given that UK phone numbers are 11 digits long and all start with '07' there was crudely a 1 in 100,000,000 chance of him typing in the exact remaining digits that would direct the offending image of his manhood to that specific individual. "But they can't prove it wasn't a wrong number" he said.
A friend served on a jury.
Apparently, a chap was sitting on a stolen motorcycle he had bought un-knowingly from a bloke in pub. He was outside a jewellery shop. There was a bit of a commotion and a man he had never seen before in his life ran out of the shop, dressed in motorcycling gear. And jumped on the back of the bike. And shouted "Go Go". So he did the obvious thing, and floored it. After a high speed crash in a police chase, he did the obvious thing and...... carried on trying to run away.
After the verdict, the jury were given some facts that had previously been considered prejudicial.
Apparently the two gentlemen did know each other. They had recently been released from prison. Having served their sentences for a previous effort. A jewellery store robbery that failed. After the driver crashed the motorcycle, in the get away....
Criticism here of "moving with the times" and the like.
Let's look at the central issue here: why is the NT and its visitor base so elderly and white?
Well, I can draw on my own experience here: it's boring. As a child, English Heritage was exciting: castles, battle re-enactments, Romans, Saxons, medieval villages and fairs - it was fun and you could immerse yourself in it.
The National Trust? A lot of big houses with old furniture in. I wasn't interested.
As an adult, particularly an older adult, you become more interested because you have your own stale life and you want to imagine what it would have been like to live there as the Lord and Lady. It becomes an escapist fantasy for you, and you learn to admire heritage, structure - and different lifestyles more - and deeper meanings of society and life too. Of course, this triggers the radical Left because it probes all sorts of Marxist erogenous zones here around class, false consciousness, gender and race - but we ignore them. Everyone know most of the families who have stately homes didn't get them from working faithfully at John Lewis for 40 years, and they were all of their time. You can tell a story without discrediting British history at the same time, still less telling it along racial lines and preaching guilt and shame. That will simply divide us.
In a sense, visiting a NT properties is a bit like a religious service: you're not very interested (at all) as a child, unless in a very religious family, but sometimes you find some comfort and solace in it (and respect for it) when you are older. Even if not, you appreciate the architectural beauty of the buildings.
My solution?
Make British heritage our common heritage and inheritance for all of us regardless of race. Get more multi-racial actors and actresses into our period dramas and histories. Own it. Teach about Jane Austen, Downton Abbey, and Agatha Christie, sure, but bring people into that costume drama and fantasy too regardless of race. Second, I would have more re-enactments, audiovisual displays, live storytelling, and "bring to life" history days at NT properties; the kids can be the Butler, Cook or the Lord. Make it fun and exciting. Third, I'd coach/bus children in from inner cities to NT properties, so they can see them and enjoy them - much of the imbalance is due simply to transport and its rurality - and, finally, give every kid in the land the taste of a cream tea. It's amazing, and life changing.
All in all? Let's include people in our national story, not trash it. It's not hard.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
But what lies beneath?
The ladies of a certain age are volunteers. They are always moaning about pay and conditions - or rather, conditions - and how terribly they are treated by the NT, which makes one ask why they don't adopt the obvious remedy.
Now this is proper big news. The likely new leader of the free world. Who in 1950 would have thought Germany would hold that position in 2020? The times they are a changing, no question about it. On which topic I like the Header and especially the title - Europe's Last American. It's fading fast, the sense of kinship between us and the USA. I can vouch for this personally. I used to feel it, even quite recently, but now I don't. I remain fascinated by America but I look upon it as a strange and exotic land. Much of this is because of Trump but not all of it.
Germany's leader is not the leader of the free world. Biden will be from Wednesday.
Germany is not big enough, the EU might be but does not have the will
Well I look to Berlin not Washington these days for a steer on how I as a citizen of the free world should go about my business.
And while I have you, let's just knock our bet on the head. £25 to a Good Cause. I give you 3 options. Mermaids. Jeremy Corbyn's new Peace & Fellowship project. Or the National Trust.
No receipt required. I trust you 100%.
I will make a payment to the NT
Toby Young said we all had to ragequit the NT. Based patriots complied.
Yes, apparently explaining the history of their properties was a crime against British history, or something.
It’s not always a simple as that. A good friend of mine’s cousin was a very private man. His family knew he was gay but he wanted that kept quiet both because it was personal (and because it was illegal at the time).
The national trust chose to make it public without consulting his family which caused a great deal of upset
They have developed a proven track record of breaking covenants - no not just allowing fox-hunting on their land.
A legal friend was involved in one case. A property had been deeded to the National Trust. The NT wanted to break the agreement they had signed with the family in question. The NT argument to the court consisted, essentially, of "We are the National Trust, therefore legal agreements should be varied for us,. Because we want to."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Reined in. Please.
Ah, shucks. Apols.
Never mind about that. It was one of your very best posts. I sense it will live on.
Our German Shepherds have very ample ruffs around their necks for the same reason. They, too, know how to survive wolves, but are my no means 'doux et moelleux'
Now this is proper big news. The likely new leader of the free world. Who in 1950 would have thought Germany would hold that position in 2020? The times they are a changing, no question about it. On which topic I like the Header and especially the title - Europe's Last American. It's fading fast, the sense of kinship between us and the USA. I can vouch for this personally. I used to feel it, even quite recently, but now I don't. I remain fascinated by America but I look upon it as a strange and exotic land. Much of this is because of Trump but not all of it.
Germany's leader is not the leader of the free world. Biden will be from Wednesday.
Germany is not big enough, the EU might be but does not have the will
Well I look to Berlin not Washington these days for a steer on how I as a citizen of the free world should go about my business.
And while I have you, let's just knock our bet on the head. £25 to a Good Cause. I give you 3 options. Mermaids. Jeremy Corbyn's new Peace & Fellowship project. Or the National Trust.
No receipt required. I trust you 100%.
I will make a payment to the NT
Toby Young said we all had to ragequit the NT. Based patriots complied.
Yes, apparently explaining the history of their properties was a crime against British history, or something.
It’s not always a simple as that. A good friend of mine’s cousin was a very private man. His family knew he was gay but he wanted that kept quiet both because it was personal (and because it was illegal at the time).
The national trust chose to make it public without consulting his family which caused a great deal of upset
They have developed a proven track record of breaking covenants - no not just allowing fox-hunting on their land.
A legal friend was involved in one case. A property had been deeded to the National Trust. The NT wanted to break the agreement they had signed with the family in question. The NT argument to the court consisted, essentially, of "We are the National Trust, therefore legal agreements should be varied for us,. Because we want to."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
You need to have a word sharpish with @HYUFD. He's giving them £25 tomorrow to settle our bet but perhaps he could attach a "no wokerie" rider. Insist it goes on unusual but delicious jams for the cafes.
Well, we don't always agree. I don't agree with him on sending tanks into Scotland, for example.
My view isn't a outlandish view. They've been criticised by dozens of Conservative MPs, the Culture Secretary, several eminent historians and even through an editorial in The Times. So far they've been entirely unrepentant and seem to view such criticism as evidence that "the problem" is bigger than they thought, so they should double-down. This latest thing about getting a left-wing academic to indoctrinate children through the colonial countryside project, who then preach back to volunteers and staff, is something Pol Pot could have thought up.
I have written to Hilary McGrady about it, politely, explaining my reasons for cancelling my membership and why I won't donate or re-join until it recognises where it's going wrong.
She's perfectly entitled to ignore me, of course. And I am entitled to withhold my money and support.
Given the number of people who will have completely cancelled their membership having not been able to use it I suspect your complaint will be lost in the panic of just trying to keep members.
I don't think so. They know they've caused a stir.
The issue is that they don't think they've done anything wrong.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
Of course the people staffing the properties are; but too many of their bosses are typical anti-nationalists. Charles Moore gently thunders on the topic here:
On the contrary, part of what seems to have pricked Moore's thumb in that article is the criticism of Churchill and Curzon's "antinationalism". Particularly amusing the writer wailing about contested terms like "colonialism" (well that's a woke criticism if ever I saw one) whilst slipping into pejorative terms like "hit list" and bemoaning the fact someone had the temerity to comment about the British monarchy's silence about its chequered past.
I am a member of the NT, and this criticism reads more like the hurt feelings of someone who's stumbled upon the idea that some people see a benefit in reassessing our country's past and emphasising that not everything was good. And God knows, someone needs to say it. I think I'll be keeping my NT membership.
Mrs P and I bought life memberships when we retired and, this excepted, we've had great value from it ever since.
Funnily enough, whenever we vist a NT property, it's the buildings, landscapes, gardens and art works we tend to notice, not the politics. That said, it seems entriely right to point out to visitors where a property has been built on the back of slave trade profits, and to show the inequities inherent in the country house lifestyle of former times.
Finally, as a wheelchair user I applaud the NT's efforts to make their properties as accessible as possible within the constraints of old buildings etc. They put English Heritage to shame - the latter give the impression they could'nt give a damn about access.
OT - interesting thred, but think Pip (aka Quincel) may be wrong about one key factor.
Namely, the assertion that "Republicans have little chance in the general". When in fact some of the most famous - and occasionally successful - mayors in the history of New York City have in fact been elected (at least for starters) as Republicans.
> Michael Bloomberg, who IIRC changed his registration from Democratic to Republican before he entered his 1st mayors race. Why? Because he knew that he stood VERY little chance of winning the Democratic nomination, given the byzantine nature of NYC Democratic politics. SO instead, he ran as a Republican - and won.
> Rudolph Giuliani was always a Republican (before he morphed into a Nazi) and while he lost his first race for mayor (to Democrat David Dinkins) in a close race, he won the rematch four years later.
> John Lindsay did much the same thing to first win election as Mayor. Then, when he ran for re-election and lost the GOP nomination (to a conservative) he was the standard bearer for the Liberal Party, and won again.
> Fiorello La Guardia is the most famous example, and also the greatest mayor in the history of New York City, was a progressive Republican, not because of his love of the GOP but because of his hatred for Tammy Hall which dominated NYC Democratic politics. So he ran as a Republican AND as an Independent "Fusion" candidate - and won, then went on to be re-elected twice the same way.
SO while it may seem that the Republican nomination SHOULD be worthless in New York CIty, based on partisan voting patters from the White House to the state house, this is NOT always the case.
Of course Democrat Bill De Blasio broke the pattern. But given that HE could not get himself elected dogcatcher this decade let alone mayor (even IF he wasn't precluded from running this year by term limit).
I do think that the GOP would stand a bit of a chance if they had anyone impressive in the mix on their side: But I also think that New York has become more reliably Democrat in the last 10-20 years just as rural areas have become even more red and many cities even more blue.
Would Giuliani win today, for example (or would a 2008 Boris Johnson in 2021 London)? They'd still have a chance, but I think they'd have a very difficult task even then.
(Obviously if the GOP do get a competitive candidate then it will make the price on all the Dem candidates more attractive to lay at current prices.)
IN other words, breaching the constitution of the UK.
The opposite, the constitution of the UK is based on the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament at Westminster.
It is about time the UK government started directing more funds to Scotland itself rather than letting the Nationalists use them to push their Nat agenda to break up the UK
Your unwritten constitution included the Sewell convention, whcih makes such actions illegal in devolved areas without the permission of the Scottish Parliament. Much was made of it by the unionists. Turns out because it's only an unwritten convention when it comes to actually looking at the law, it is meanijngless, and can be ignored.
That is your precious unwritten constitution and that is how precious useless it is.
These are funds reclaimed from the EU being spent by the UK government in Scotland, still part of the UK,
The Sewel convention was made before Brexit and did not cover new powers and new funds then neither available to Westminster or Holyrood which have now become available post Brexit
OT - interesting thred, but think Pip (aka Quincel) may be wrong about one key factor.
Namely, the assertion that "Republicans have little chance in the general". When in fact some of the most famous - and occasionally successful - mayors in the history of New York City have in fact been elected (at least for starters) as Republicans.
> Michael Bloomberg, who IIRC changed his registration from Democratic to Republican before he entered his 1st mayors race. Why? Because he knew that he stood VERY little chance of winning the Democratic nomination, given the byzantine nature of NYC Democratic politics. SO instead, he ran as a Republican - and won.
> Rudolph Giuliani was always a Republican (before he morphed into a Nazi) and while he lost his first race for mayor (to Democrat David Dinkins) in a close race, he won the rematch four years later.
> John Lindsay did much the same thing to first win election as Mayor. Then, when he ran for re-election and lost the GOP nomination (to a conservative) he was the standard bearer for the Liberal Party, and won again.
> Fiorello La Guardia is the most famous example, and also the greatest mayor in the history of New York City, was a progressive Republican, not because of his love of the GOP but because of his hatred for Tammy Hall which dominated NYC Democratic politics. So he ran as a Republican AND as an Independent "Fusion" candidate - and won, then went on to be re-elected twice the same way.
SO while it may seem that the Republican nomination SHOULD be worthless in New York CIty, based on partisan voting patters from the White House to the state house, this is NOT always the case.
Of course Democrat Bill De Blasio broke the pattern. But given that HE could not get himself elected dogcatcher this decade let alone mayor (even IF he wasn't precluded from running this year by term limit).
I do think that the GOP would stand a bit of a chance if they had anyone impressive in the mix on their side: But I also think that New York has become more reliably Democrat in the last 10-20 years just as rural areas have become even more red and many cities even more blue.
Would Giuliani win today, for example (or would a 2008 Boris Johnson in 2021 London)? They'd still have a chance, but I think they'd have a very difficult task even then.
The extreme toxicity of the Republican brand, thanks to Trump (and Giuliani) and their ilk, makes things different this year.
Re: Yang running for mayor of New York City, methinks his chances of getting out of the Democratic primary are less hopeful that may PBers may think.
For one thing, while number of Asian Americans in increasing in NYC, still not a huge base. Though larger than the geek vote, even in NYC.
PLUS how is he gonna deal with fact that he fled NYC during the COVID, on grounds that life in a two-bedroom apartment in the city was unbearable, or at least untenable?
Heck, even Nelson "Hiya Fella!" Rockefeller was more of a Man of the People, or a least more of a mensch.
IN other words, breaching the constitution of the UK.
The opposite, the constitution of the UK is based on the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament at Westminster.
It is about time the UK government started directing more funds to Scotland itself rather than letting the Nationalists use them to push their Nat agenda to break up the UK
Your unwritten constitution included the Sewell convention, whcih makes such actions illegal in devolved areas without the permission of the Scottish Parliament. Much was made of it by the unionists. Turns out because it's only an unwritten convention when it comes to actually looking at the law, it is meanijngless, and can be ignored.
That is your precious unwritten constitution and that is how precious useless it is.
These are funds reclaimed from the EU being spent by the UK government in Scotland, still part of the UK,
The Sewel convention was made before Brexit and did not cover new powers and new funds then neither available to Westminster or Holyrood which have now become available post Brexit
But the funds and powers fall within areas determined by the devolution acts as pertaining to the Scottish Government. And changing those powers requires consent by the Scottish Parliament under the Sewell Convention. Unless you think Brexit cancelled that? What else did it ****ing cancel? Magna Carta?
National Trust moves with the times; right-wing Tories gnash their teeth.
Anything else happening?
My mum always refused to visit National Trust properties on the grounds that a lot of them became National Trust properties due to Labour's introduction of massive death duties.
So this isn't a new thing.
That was a period of cultural vandalism. Thousands of beautiful country houses were demolished to satisfy socialist hatred of what they saw as the landed gentry. The alternative was to hand over the properties to the National Trust. Nationalised theft on a massive scale.
Here's a thought. The time I will be at greatest risk of catching Covid in the next 3 months will be when I attend to get my first jab...
And the period after the jab until a significant immune response is launched, if you (consciously or subconsciously) change your behaviour upon receipt of the jab.
Now this is proper big news. The likely new leader of the free world. Who in 1950 would have thought Germany would hold that position in 2020? The times they are a changing, no question about it. On which topic I like the Header and especially the title - Europe's Last American. It's fading fast, the sense of kinship between us and the USA. I can vouch for this personally. I used to feel it, even quite recently, but now I don't. I remain fascinated by America but I look upon it as a strange and exotic land. Much of this is because of Trump but not all of it.
Germany's leader is not the leader of the free world. Biden will be from Wednesday.
Germany is not big enough, the EU might be but does not have the will
Well I look to Berlin not Washington these days for a steer on how I as a citizen of the free world should go about my business.
And while I have you, let's just knock our bet on the head. £25 to a Good Cause. I give you 3 options. Mermaids. Jeremy Corbyn's new Peace & Fellowship project. Or the National Trust.
No receipt required. I trust you 100%.
I will make a payment to the NT
Toby Young said we all had to ragequit the NT. Based patriots complied.
Yes, apparently explaining the history of their properties was a crime against British history, or something.
It’s not always a simple as that. A good friend of mine’s cousin was a very private man. His family knew he was gay but he wanted that kept quiet both because it was personal (and because it was illegal at the time).
The national trust chose to make it public without consulting his family which caused a great deal of upset
They have developed a proven track record of breaking covenants - no not just allowing fox-hunting on their land.
A legal friend was involved in one case. A property had been deeded to the National Trust. The NT wanted to break the agreement they had signed with the family in question. The NT argument to the court consisted, essentially, of "We are the National Trust, therefore legal agreements should be varied for us,. Because we want to."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
You need to have a word sharpish with @HYUFD. He's giving them £25 tomorrow to settle our bet but perhaps he could attach a "no wokerie" rider. Insist it goes on unusual but delicious jams for the cafes.
Well, we don't always agree. I don't agree with him on sending tanks into Scotland, for example.
My view isn't a outlandish view. They've been criticised by dozens of Conservative MPs, the Culture Secretary, several eminent historians and even through an editorial in The Times. So far they've been entirely unrepentant and seem to view such criticism as evidence that "the problem" is bigger than they thought, so they should double-down. This latest thing about getting a left-wing academic to indoctrinate children through the colonial countryside project, who then preach back to volunteers and staff, is something Pol Pot could have thought up.
I have written to Hilary McGrady about it, politely, explaining my reasons for cancelling my membership and why I won't donate or re-join until it recognises where it's going wrong.
She's perfectly entitled to ignore me, of course. And I am entitled to withhold my money and support.
I'd figured you were doing hyperbolic satire - and rather brilliantly - but ok it appears not. It's clear you've given it more thought than most.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
Of course the people staffing the properties are; but too many of their bosses are typical anti-nationalists. Charles Moore gently thunders on the topic here:
On the contrary, part of what seems to have pricked Moore's thumb in that article is the criticism of Churchill and Curzon's "antinationalism". Particularly amusing the writer wailing about contested terms like "colonialism" (well that's a woke criticism if ever I saw one) whilst slipping into pejorative terms like "hit list" and bemoaning the fact someone had the temerity to comment about the British monarchy's silence about its chequered past.
I am a member of the NT, and this criticism reads more like the hurt feelings of someone who's stumbled upon the idea that some people see a benefit in reassessing our country's past and emphasising that not everything was good. And God knows, someone needs to say it. I think I'll be keeping my NT membership.
But of course you will - they represent your political ideology now, not that of the public at large. That's, er, the whole point of this discussion.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
Of course the people staffing the properties are; but too many of their bosses are typical anti-nationalists. Charles Moore gently thunders on the topic here:
On the contrary, part of what seems to have pricked Moore's thumb in that article is the criticism of Churchill and Curzon's "antinationalism". Particularly amusing the writer wailing about contested terms like "colonialism" (well that's a woke criticism if ever I saw one) whilst slipping into pejorative terms like "hit list" and bemoaning the fact someone had the temerity to comment about the British monarchy's silence about its chequered past.
I am a member of the NT, and this criticism reads more like the hurt feelings of someone who's stumbled upon the idea that some people see a benefit in reassessing our country's past and emphasising that not everything was good. And God knows, someone needs to say it. I think I'll be keeping my NT membership.
Mrs P and I bought life memberships when we retired and, this excepted, we've had great value from it ever since.
Funnily enough, whenever we vist a NT property, it's the buildings, landscapes, gardens and art works we tend to notice, not the politics. That said, it seems entriely right to point out to visitors where a property has been built on the back of slave trade profits, and to show the inequities inherent in the country house lifestyle of former times.
Finally, as a wheelchair user I applaud the NT's efforts to make their properties as accessible as possible within the constraints of old buildings etc. They put English Heritage to shame - the latter give the impression they could'nt give a damn about access.
Fair enough, but isn't it harder for English Heritage given they have castles and medieval buildings and the like?
And, on the former, it depends entirely how you do it. If it's a few historical information boards that allow you to explore the story yourself, sure. If it's shoved in your face as the overriding message from the second you walk in the door, together with being told in no uncertain terms what you should think about that, then no. That's insulting and divisive.
Now this is proper big news. The likely new leader of the free world. Who in 1950 would have thought Germany would hold that position in 2020? The times they are a changing, no question about it. On which topic I like the Header and especially the title - Europe's Last American. It's fading fast, the sense of kinship between us and the USA. I can vouch for this personally. I used to feel it, even quite recently, but now I don't. I remain fascinated by America but I look upon it as a strange and exotic land. Much of this is because of Trump but not all of it.
Germany's leader is not the leader of the free world. Biden will be from Wednesday.
Germany is not big enough, the EU might be but does not have the will
Well I look to Berlin not Washington these days for a steer on how I as a citizen of the free world should go about my business.
And while I have you, let's just knock our bet on the head. £25 to a Good Cause. I give you 3 options. Mermaids. Jeremy Corbyn's new Peace & Fellowship project. Or the National Trust.
No receipt required. I trust you 100%.
I will make a payment to the NT
Toby Young said we all had to ragequit the NT. Based patriots complied.
Yes, apparently explaining the history of their properties was a crime against British history, or something.
It’s not always a simple as that. A good friend of mine’s cousin was a very private man. His family knew he was gay but he wanted that kept quiet both because it was personal (and because it was illegal at the time).
The national trust chose to make it public without consulting his family which caused a great deal of upset
They have developed a proven track record of breaking covenants - no not just allowing fox-hunting on their land.
A legal friend was involved in one case. A property had been deeded to the National Trust. The NT wanted to break the agreement they had signed with the family in question. The NT argument to the court consisted, essentially, of "We are the National Trust, therefore legal agreements should be varied for us,. Because we want to."
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
You need to have a word sharpish with @HYUFD. He's giving them £25 tomorrow to settle our bet but perhaps he could attach a "no wokerie" rider. Insist it goes on unusual but delicious jams for the cafes.
Well, we don't always agree. I don't agree with him on sending tanks into Scotland, for example.
My view isn't a outlandish view. They've been criticised by dozens of Conservative MPs, the Culture Secretary, several eminent historians and even through an editorial in The Times. So far they've been entirely unrepentant and seem to view such criticism as evidence that "the problem" is bigger than they thought, so they should double-down. This latest thing about getting a left-wing academic to indoctrinate children through the colonial countryside project, who then preach back to volunteers and staff, is something Pol Pot could have thought up.
I have written to Hilary McGrady about it, politely, explaining my reasons for cancelling my membership and why I won't donate or re-join until it recognises where it's going wrong.
She's perfectly entitled to ignore me, of course. And I am entitled to withhold my money and support.
I'd figured you were doing hyperbolic satire - and rather brilliantly - but ok it appears not. It's clear you've given it more thought than most.
Encouraging signs on the case numbers suggesting lockdown (possibly aided by the poor weather helping to keep people indoors - it was certainly quiet in a rainy East Ham this morning) is having an impact.
The numbers of deaths profoundly depressing unfortunately and the numbers in hospital also worrying.
I had expected the impact of vaccination to be a fall off in the numbers of those dying (with those most at risk of so doing being vaccinated) and a fall in the numbers of those in hospital (for similar reasons) while case numbers might remain high due to transmission among younger and therefore less vulnerable individuals.
Today's figures suggest something else is going on - are we seeing more younger people being hospitalised or is it the numbers of vaccinations are yet to have an impact for whatever reason.
For context, in the UK, 3.4 million people over 80, 9 million between 65 and 80 and a further 13 million between 50 and 65.
In England alone 3 million people have had at least one dose of vaccine since December 8th.
As to how long it will take, that will depend on how many choose to take up the offer of the vaccine.
Hospital admissions are a trailing indicator - most people are admitted to hospital some time after first showing symptoms.
Likewise vaccinations also have a lead time - if it is 10 days before the vaccination takes full effect it will be something like 14/17 days from the date of vaccination before it will impact hospital numbers.
So I can see why things look how they do at the moment - the number of older (80 plus) patients being hospitalized will start dropping over the next 2 weeks.
It's to be expected that the fall would initially be most dramatic in the working age age groups, the groups most exposed to transmission in the workplace and via school age children.
Unfortunately the case numbers amongst the 85+ group seem hardly to have moved yet. I think that's a combination of the belated spread of infections into care homes, later than in the wider community just as in April, plus the fact that the lockdown will have had less effect amongst very old people generally, because very old people in the community had been shielding like mad all along.
That should change dramatically in the next couple of weeks given the acceleration of the vaccine roll out since the start of the year.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Not cancel them, though. But to get such a politicised organisation to actually listen you need to hit them where it hurts.
The wallet.
I suspect that cancelling NT membership because they have the wrong type of history is very much a minority pursuit.
At least it a membership organisation, where you can in theory influence its direction. How do you "join" Oxfam?
I've just laid another 20 quid on Brian Rose (@bf9). 198k matched on the selection, which I guess equates to them perhaps having thrown 50k-75k at it (BF double counts and there's undoubtedly a lot of small profit taking).
I wonder when they'll stop?
I was really hoping that the Piers Corbyn campaign might try to join in, but they're either too smart or too stupid. The only amusement on that side is that the declared Corby brother is longer odds than the undeclared one.
I don't think that Khan is nailed on by any means - seems to me the current pricing is about right. I still like the idea that there could be a varied and split race, but the Tories seem entirely unengaged, and although you hear snippets from the LDs it's only snippets.
I'd have liked to see the campaign in normal times with Rory Stewart in the mix.
If Yang does get elected NYC Mayor will show the benefit of running in presidential primaries to raise your profile even if you do not end up nominee
Will be interesting to see how much name ID that Yang actually has in New York.
Of course it IS true that Michael Bloomberg was aided by his pre-electoral name ID when HE ran for mayor.
However when it came to William F. Buckley, not so much. Though to be fair, WFB never expected to win, indeed when asked what he would do IF he did, he replied, "Demand a recount".
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
But what lies beneath?
The ladies of a certain age are volunteers. They are always moaning about pay and conditions - or rather, conditions - and how terribly they are treated by the NT, which makes one ask why they don't adopt the obvious remedy.
Really? Did not realise that. I quite like pottering around a National Trust property. There, I've said it.
National Trust moves with the times; right-wing Tories gnash their teeth.
Anything else happening?
Yes, attitudes like yours and comments like that are the problem.
My attitude is bad whereas yours is good, because...?
Because you are blind to seeing any criticism of it and simply view my opposition as reactionary.
If you recognised and at least engaged with some of my points, I'd perhaps think differently.
You know what? I really don't care.
If you don't like the National Trust, don't go and don't pay.
I don't like Wetherspoons, so I don't go there.
I'd almost rather saw my own ear off than get involved in this argument, but that is a bad point. Mr Wetherspoon owns his Wetherspoonses outright and can do what he wants with them. The NT owns properties on trust, for the nation, and would best discharge its duties by quietly maintaining the fabric, managing the land and leaving history to the historians.
We need to disavow ourselves of the notion The National Trust is a friendly and benign custodian of our nation's heritage anymore.
It isn't. It's become an arrogant and highly politicised campaigning organisation that's been successfully captured by the Left, and thinks it's above the law.
It needs to be put back in its box.
I wouldn't advise anyone giving them any money until they reform themselves, or are reigned in and told to do so by government.
Cancel the National Trust? FFS.
Casino's comment sounds encouraging. Perhaps I should join. What other fronts of the culture war am I neglecting?
All the National Trust properties I have visited seem to be run by ladies of a certain age in tweed skirts and sensible shoes. And the cafes are full of comfortable middle class families in Burberry and wellies having tea and scones. It's all quintessentially English.
But what lies beneath?
The ladies of a certain age are volunteers. They are always moaning about pay and conditions - or rather, conditions - and how terribly they are treated by the NT, which makes one ask why they don't adopt the obvious remedy.
Really? Did not realise that. I quite like pottering around a National Trust property. There, I've said it.
The more I hear about how the people who work at the front end in the charitable sector are treated, the more I become convinced of two things.
- Reincarnation. In the case of the employing charities, they appear to have got Protestant Irish landlords and the less reputable kinds of mine owner from the 19th cent. - The all need to join a union. Run by a reincarnation of Bob Crow. But angrier.
National Trust moves with the times; right-wing Tories gnash their teeth.
Anything else happening?
My mum always refused to visit National Trust properties on the grounds that a lot of them became National Trust properties due to Labour's introduction of massive death duties.
So this isn't a new thing.
That was a period of cultural vandalism. Thousands of beautiful country houses were demolished to satisfy socialist hatred of what they saw as the landed gentry. The alternative was to hand over the properties to the National Trust. Nationalised theft on a massive scale.
You exaggerate. But regardless, where did the families of those "victims of theft" get the wealth that built the places in the first place?
National Trust moves with the times; right-wing Tories gnash their teeth.
Anything else happening?
My mum always refused to visit National Trust properties on the grounds that a lot of them became National Trust properties due to Labour's introduction of massive death duties.
So this isn't a new thing.
That was a period of cultural vandalism. Thousands of beautiful country houses were demolished to satisfy socialist hatred of what they saw as the landed gentry. The alternative was to hand over the properties to the National Trust. Nationalised theft on a massive scale.
Many were unliveable junk, with vast costs to keep them going. Quite a lot of owners wanted rid.
If you look through history, the fate of such houses was to vanish, anyway.
I met a chap who bought a minor chateaux in Normandy. Third Empire, all very picturesque. Cost about a zillion a year to keep it in shabby gentility as a rentable property.
National Trust moves with the times; right-wing Tories gnash their teeth.
Anything else happening?
Yes, attitudes like yours and comments like that are the problem.
My attitude is bad whereas yours is good, because...?
Because you are blind to seeing any criticism of it and simply view my opposition as reactionary.
If you recognised and at least engaged with some of my points, I'd perhaps think differently.
You know what? I really don't care.
If you don't like the National Trust, don't go and don't pay.
I don't like Wetherspoons, so I don't go there.
I'd almost rather saw my own ear off than get involved in this argument, but that is a bad point. Mr Wetherspoon owns his Wetherspoonses outright and can do what he wants with them. The NT owns properties on trust, for the nation, and would best discharge its duties by quietly maintaining the fabric, managing the land and leaving history to the historians.
Explaining the history of its properties and how they were acquired does seem to be a core part of their role, no matter how much CR prefers to draw a veil across the less salubrious bits of our past.
I can direct Casino Royale to National Trust properties where the old traditions are maintained and he can listen to pleasant & soothing stories of Empire.
Wales.
Last time I visited Powys Castle, there was an exhibition presenting booty acquired by Clive of India, father of the British Raj, famed for his maladministration and self-enrichment. This wanker’s only connection to Powys Castle is that his son acquired it by marriage in the early nineteenth century. So, pretty damn tenuous. There was nothing about the thousand year story of the kingdom of Powys and the Castle's connection to its ruling dynasty.
Because Welsh history is of no fucking interest to the National Trust.
The National Trust are a huge landowner in Wales. They own almost all land from Abergwyngregyn to Beddgelert in the north, Solfach to Stackpole in the West and holdings such as Abergwesyn in the south.
It is effectively a modern-day Marcher lordship, administered by the braying English fleece jacketed middle classes to use as a weekend playground.
We need legislation in Wales to recover the National Trust landholdings to a body answerable to the people of Wales. Not the people of England, whether woke or unwoke.
Comments
My view isn't a outlandish view. They've been criticised by dozens of Conservative MPs, the Culture Secretary, several eminent historians and even through an editorial in The Times. So far they've been entirely unrepentant and seem to view such criticism as evidence that "the problem" is bigger than they thought, so they should double-down. This latest thing about getting a left-wing academic to indoctrinate children through the colonial countryside project, who then preach back to volunteers and staff, is something Pol Pot could have thought up.
I have written to Hilary McGrady about it, politely, explaining my reasons for cancelling my membership and why I won't donate or re-join until it recognises where it's going wrong.
She's perfectly entitled to ignore me, of course. And I am entitled to withhold my money and support.
Who does that benefit, I wonder?
If they turned that kind of skill to a legitimate (or just vaguely legal) goal, they would be successful and rich. Maybe even respected.
Instead they eternally flit across the pages at the back of Private Eye.
If one doesn't believe me try selecting just a few of the leading NT staff at random and checking their Twitter feeds or LinkedIn profiles. You'll see they (together with those at the British Museum etc.) all have similar backgrounds, know each other, have worked together in the past, largely share similar political views and support each other in Twitter spats online.
One reason they are all nervous is because their council is 100% white - see here: https://nt.global.ssl.fastly.net/documents/download-meet-the-council.pdf - and they are conscious that their visitors are overwhelmingly old and white.
They assume the answer is crud like whitewashing and colonialism in the past etc. and therefore the solution must be Wokery. They thus alienate and insult the intelligence of their existing base, whilst patronising and condescending minorities they seek to attract. Meanwhile, they mutually reinforce each others intrinsic rightness at HQ through this criticism as just further evidence of the British public's latent racism and bigotry.
It's all bollocks. It won't end until they get some genuine (political and social) diversity in the boardroom, and they feel it in the pocket to make the point.
Anything else happening?
https://music.apple.com/au/album/toccata-and-fugue-in-d-minor-bwv-565-1-toccata/1452674133?i=1452674142
New UK Shared Prosperity Fund to bypass Holyrood
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55687977?at_custom2=twitter&at_campaign=64&at_custom1=[post+type]&at_custom4=DCFC8E02-580F-11EB-B4F1-081116F31EAE&at_medium=custom7&at_custom3=@BBCScotlandNews
The fact that £200,000 they over claimed on expenses was just resting in their account was merely part of them checking out the systems in place.
They just want to get ahead. In the style of the trader at Goldman Sachs who commented he was off to Belgium to sell CDS to widows and orphans.
Kicking tenant farmers off their land and then saying "try and enforce your lease - we will just spend on lawyers until you go broke" - that's not very progressive, is it?
So this isn't a new thing.
I was going WTF?
My boss, who was wise in the ways of arseholes, smiled. And said "we have him now"...
Yes, said office politician had committed all the expense frauds you could think of. The set of cab receipts, over a number of years, written on the same printed receipt pad, with identical handwriting.... All the classics were there....
"Graphs diverge on day 14 with a 33% decline among the vaccinated elderly, without a similar trend among the unvaccinated,” he said. He added that more information would be forthcoming from more detailed peer-reviewed studies currently underway."
From: https://www.timesofisrael.com/how-well-does-the-vaccine-work-israels-real-world-stats-can-be-globes-guide/
I think the numbers in Israel vaccinated are now lower because they are doing mostly booster doses. I note from Sunday all aged 45+ are eligible.
Sometimes it might be a slight caused by not getting a pay increase or sometimes they do it for the thrill.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9154677/Englands-streets-lie-deserted-amid-Covid-19-lockdown.html
Trump still won Florida with 51% of the vote last November so it remains very much Trump country as well as being the home of Mar a Lago
My view is that the definition of high taxation and economic redistribution, alone, for left-wing is outmoded. There is arguably an even more important vector these days of cultural Marxism, which is more insidious, and that's the fulcrum for my definition these days as it represents the clearer political dividing line.
It's entirely hypocritical on the former count too, though, too as you suggest.
This isn't difficult.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/rishi-sunak-plans-500-gift-for-benefit-claimants-to-avoid-tory-uprising-8qcl6j2pm
I still have nightmares about that, the cataloguing of the evidence took some effort.
Writing up a manager of charity shop for poor performance - because she didn't get enough volunteers in, so that they couldn't send home the paid staff who had been allocated hours... I am to the right of Ghengis Khan etc. but that is completely Scrooge McDuck stuff....
Particularly amusing the writer wailing about contested terms like "colonialism" (well that's a woke criticism if ever I saw one) whilst slipping into pejorative terms like "hit list" and bemoaning the fact someone had the temerity to comment about the British monarchy's silence about its chequered past.
I am a member of the NT, and this criticism reads more like the hurt feelings of someone who's stumbled upon the idea that some people see a benefit in reassessing our country's past and emphasising that not everything was good. And God knows, someone needs to say it.
I think I'll be keeping my NT membership.
Also
Everyone will love the UK when we stick flags on stuff!
The idea that the hispanic community would "very much" back Ivanka over Rubio is a brave but entirely unsubstantiated suggestion.
Namely, the assertion that "Republicans have little chance in the general". When in fact some of the most famous - and occasionally successful - mayors in the history of New York City have in fact been elected (at least for starters) as Republicans.
> Michael Bloomberg, who IIRC changed his registration from Democratic to Republican before he entered his 1st mayors race. Why? Because he knew that he stood VERY little chance of winning the Democratic nomination, given the byzantine nature of NYC Democratic politics. SO instead, he ran as a Republican - and won.
> Rudolph Giuliani was always a Republican (before he morphed into a Nazi) and while he lost his first race for mayor (to Democrat David Dinkins) in a close race, he won the rematch four years later.
> John Lindsay did much the same thing to first win election as Mayor. Then, when he ran for re-election and lost the GOP nomination (to a conservative) he was the standard bearer for the Liberal Party, and won again.
> Fiorello La Guardia is the most famous example, and also the greatest mayor in the history of New York City, was a progressive Republican, not because of his love of the GOP but because of his hatred for Tammy Hall which dominated NYC Democratic politics. So he ran as a Republican AND as an Independent "Fusion" candidate - and won, then went on to be re-elected twice the same way.
SO while it may seem that the Republican nomination SHOULD be worthless in New York CIty, based on partisan voting patters from the White House to the state house, this is NOT always the case.
Of course Democrat Bill De Blasio broke the pattern. But given that HE could not get himself elected dogcatcher this decade let alone mayor (even IF he wasn't precluded from running this year by term limit).
To portray the elite of society as more benevolent than they really were is right-wing propaganda in itself. That is the real problem.
It's actually quite relevant to know where the money came from to build great estate X and big house Y. Or are we supposed to think they won the pools or something? And that the landowners were necessarily benevolent?
Near where I live, the big houses were built in part on laws passed by the elite which doomed local people to serfdom - slavery, we would call it - as hereditary miners and salters passed like property - indeed sometimes sold as property - from laird to laird.
It doesn't stop me from being a member of the National Trust for Scotland (which to their credit is considering the issue of slavery in all senses and wealth that came from it) and I wouldn't dream of knocking anything down or burning any paintings. But there is a history that we all must inquire into, and remember and contemplate for the good and the bad, in our forebears' senses and ours.
People find out the hard (fnarr) way that it is possible to record facetime calls.
It is about time the UK government started directing more funds to Scotland itself rather than letting the Nationalists use them to push their Nat agenda to break up the UK
https://twitter.com/MOTJGOALS/status/1350475462712188932?s=20
Apparently, a chap was sitting on a stolen motorcycle he had bought un-knowingly from a bloke in pub. He was outside a jewellery shop. There was a bit of a commotion and a man he had never seen before in his life ran out of the shop, dressed in motorcycling gear. And jumped on the back of the bike. And shouted "Go Go". So he did the obvious thing, and floored it. After a high speed crash in a police chase, he did the obvious thing and...... carried on trying to run away.
After the verdict, the jury were given some facts that had previously been considered prejudicial.
Apparently the two gentlemen did know each other. They had recently been released from prison. Having served their sentences for a previous effort. A jewellery store robbery that failed. After the driver crashed the motorcycle, in the get away....
That is your precious unwritten constitution and that is how precious useless it is.
With respect to the NT, it does a reasonably good job. It is a little too PC in many ways IMO and it's PC agenda in airbrushing out the contribution made to country estates by country sports (so as not to offend the easily offended) is irritating to some of us who like to see proper unbiased historical accounts. But on the whole it does a prgood job as guardian of some of our most famous estates.
Let's look at the central issue here: why is the NT and its visitor base so elderly and white?
Well, I can draw on my own experience here: it's boring. As a child, English Heritage was exciting: castles, battle re-enactments, Romans, Saxons, medieval villages and fairs - it was fun and you could immerse yourself in it.
The National Trust? A lot of big houses with old furniture in. I wasn't interested.
As an adult, particularly an older adult, you become more interested because you have your own stale life and you want to imagine what it would have been like to live there as the Lord and Lady. It becomes an escapist fantasy for you, and you learn to admire heritage, structure - and different lifestyles more - and deeper meanings of society and life too. Of course, this triggers the radical Left because it probes all sorts of Marxist erogenous zones here around class, false consciousness, gender and race - but we ignore them. Everyone know most of the families who have stately homes didn't get them from working faithfully at John Lewis for 40 years, and they were all of their time. You can tell a story without discrediting British history at the same time, still less telling it along racial lines and preaching guilt and shame. That will simply divide us.
In a sense, visiting a NT properties is a bit like a religious service: you're not very interested (at all) as a child, unless in a very religious family, but sometimes you find some comfort and solace in it (and respect for it) when you are older. Even if not, you appreciate the architectural beauty of the buildings.
My solution?
Make British heritage our common heritage and inheritance for all of us regardless of race. Get more multi-racial actors and actresses into our period dramas and histories. Own it. Teach about Jane Austen, Downton Abbey, and Agatha Christie, sure, but bring people into that costume drama and fantasy too regardless of race. Second, I would have more re-enactments, audiovisual displays, live storytelling, and "bring to life" history days at NT properties; the kids can be the Butler, Cook or the Lord. Make it fun and exciting. Third, I'd coach/bus children in from inner cities to NT properties, so they can see them and enjoy them - much of the imbalance is due simply to transport and its rurality - and, finally, give every kid in the land the taste of a cream tea. It's amazing, and life changing.
All in all? Let's include people in our national story, not trash it. It's not hard.
https://twitter.com/mlhardy75/status/1349339507888422912
For all you savages who can't speak French, that sheep escaped from a farm 6 years ago and effectively became a 30 kgs of wool.
The wolves couldn't eat him as his wool was so thick, so you don't need to be tough to beat wolves, just soft and fluffy.
If you recognised and at least engaged with some of my points, I'd perhaps think differently.
That is not my point.
https://www.amusingplanet.com/2014/07/shrek-sheep-who-escaped-shearing-for-6.html?m=1
The issue is that they don't think they've done anything wrong.
Funnily enough, whenever we vist a NT property, it's the buildings, landscapes, gardens and art works we tend to notice, not the politics. That said, it seems entriely right to point out to visitors where a property has been built on the back of slave trade profits, and to show the inequities inherent in the country house lifestyle of former times.
Finally, as a wheelchair user I applaud the NT's efforts to make their properties as accessible as possible within the constraints of old buildings etc. They put English Heritage to shame - the latter give the impression they could'nt give a damn about access.
Would Giuliani win today, for example (or would a 2008 Boris Johnson in 2021 London)? They'd still have a chance, but I think they'd have a very difficult task even then.
(Obviously if the GOP do get a competitive candidate then it will make the price on all the Dem candidates more attractive to lay at current prices.)
The Sewel convention was made before Brexit and did not cover new powers and new funds then neither available to Westminster or Holyrood which have now become available post Brexit
For one thing, while number of Asian Americans in increasing in NYC, still not a huge base. Though larger than the geek vote, even in NYC.
PLUS how is he gonna deal with fact that he fled NYC during the COVID, on grounds that life in a two-bedroom apartment in the city was unbearable, or at least untenable?
Heck, even Nelson "Hiya Fella!" Rockefeller was more of a Man of the People, or a least more of a mensch.
And, on the former, it depends entirely how you do it. If it's a few historical information boards that allow you to explore the story yourself, sure. If it's shoved in your face as the overriding message from the second you walk in the door, together with being told in no uncertain terms what you should think about that, then no. That's insulting and divisive.
Anyway, I must go. Family supper beckons.
If you don't like the National Trust, don't go and don't pay.
I don't like Wetherspoons, so I don't go there.
Unfortunately the case numbers amongst the 85+ group seem hardly to have moved yet. I think that's a combination of the belated spread of infections into care homes, later than in the wider community just as in April, plus the fact that the lockdown will have had less effect amongst very old people generally, because very old people in the community had been shielding like mad all along.
That should change dramatically in the next couple of weeks given the acceleration of the vaccine roll out since the start of the year.
How do you "join" Oxfam?
I've just laid another 20 quid on Brian Rose (@bf9). 198k matched on the selection, which I guess equates to them perhaps having thrown 50k-75k at it (BF double counts and there's undoubtedly a lot of small profit taking).
I wonder when they'll stop?
I was really hoping that the Piers Corbyn campaign might try to join in, but they're either too smart or too stupid. The only amusement on that side is that the declared Corby brother is longer odds than the undeclared one.
I don't think that Khan is nailed on by any means - seems to me the current pricing is about right. I still like the idea that there could be a varied and split race, but the Tories seem entirely unengaged, and although you hear snippets from the LDs it's only snippets.
I'd have liked to see the campaign in normal times with Rory Stewart in the mix.
Of course it IS true that Michael Bloomberg was aided by his pre-electoral name ID when HE ran for mayor.
However when it came to William F. Buckley, not so much. Though to be fair, WFB never expected to win, indeed when asked what he would do IF he did, he replied, "Demand a recount".
- Reincarnation. In the case of the employing charities, they appear to have got Protestant Irish landlords and the less reputable kinds of mine owner from the 19th cent.
- The all need to join a union. Run by a reincarnation of Bob Crow. But angrier.
Hang on. Pol Pot?
You ARE doing satire. Totally sucked me in!
I slink away feeling sheepish. ☺
Who is designated survivor if Biden has no sworn in Cabinet?
If you look through history, the fate of such houses was to vanish, anyway.
I met a chap who bought a minor chateaux in Normandy. Third Empire, all very picturesque. Cost about a zillion a year to keep it in shabby gentility as a rentable property.
He's third in line in the Presidential line of succession as President Pro Tempore of the Senate.
I can direct Casino Royale to National Trust properties where the old traditions are maintained and he can listen to pleasant & soothing stories of Empire.
Wales.
Last time I visited Powys Castle, there was an exhibition presenting booty acquired by Clive of India, father of the British Raj, famed for his maladministration and self-enrichment. This wanker’s only connection to Powys Castle is that his son acquired it by marriage in the early nineteenth century. So, pretty damn tenuous. There was nothing about the thousand year story of the kingdom of Powys and the Castle's connection to its ruling dynasty.
Because Welsh history is of no fucking interest to the National Trust.
The National Trust are a huge landowner in Wales. They own almost all land from Abergwyngregyn to Beddgelert in the north, Solfach to Stackpole in the West and holdings such as Abergwesyn in the south.
It is effectively a modern-day Marcher lordship, administered by the braying English fleece jacketed middle classes to use as a weekend playground.
We need legislation in Wales to recover the National Trust landholdings to a body answerable to the people of Wales.
Not the people of England, whether woke or unwoke.