I find Dr Van Tam's recent comment that the South African variant is not expected to become the dominant form of the virus in the UK in the next few months to be very interesting. We know that the South African variant has a relative advantage over the UK variants in escaping immunity from vaccination and probably recent infection, so why would it not keep growing given that a specific vaccine against it is not currently available and will not be available until the autumn?
Could it be that the plan is essentially to maintain the lockdown in a form similar to now until the new vaccines are rolled out in the autumn, and deployed to most of the population? And even then will the lockdown be lifted, and what if by then there is a further new variant?
My guess, FWIW, is that the UK plans to use AZ for first shots, but hopefully to move onto Pfizer (or in a few cases Moderna) for the second, with CureVac for Autumn boosters.
Pfizer has massively increased its production plans for this year: in January they said they'd make 1.2 billion doses this year, and they're now saying 2 billion.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
I never said that.
I said that India don't want to be in the Anglosphere. There's a difference.
India will work with us when it's in their interests. Their interests are aligned when it comes to China but not as much on other issues.
That's why they're not a part of Five Eyes today - what I want is neither here nor there.
Well I've just had a quick chat with India and they say if there is to be an Anglosphere - which they are skeptical of tbf - they do at least want to be asked if they'd like to be in it.
You're skeptical?
There already is one and it dates back to World War Two. Which part of the past 80 years are you skeptical of?
I'm talking about the new and improved version you Brexit nostalgics are dreaming of which is soon to become a global power player to rival US, Europe & China. The retro fantasy with a white supremacy vibe. That one.
You really do slip into a very strange fantasy world sometimes.
The fantasy here is the 'Anglosphere to rival US, China, Europe' one. I see you have not succumbed to it despite being an ardent Leaver. So hats off for that.
Name one person other than you who has suggested the Anglosphere (which includes the USA) should rival the USA?
What next should the Rolling Stones rival Mick Jagger?
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
No.
They will work against China when it suits their interests but that is entirely a matter of self interest.
They aren't closer or more vital on other issues than that. They aren't a part of Five Eyes and for very good reason.
No.
India are by far the most important part of any Anglosphere arrangement or indeed any Asia Nato style arrangement to contain the Communist government of China.
Without it it would be largely toothless militarily and economically. Australia and New Zealand are tiny economically and militarily by comparison without the ability to contain China.
Otherwise forget the Anglosphere and just leave the US to deal with maintaining security in Asia as usual with other nations involved as and when needed
A truly bizarre point of view.
An Anglosphere United on Foreign Policy would easily match up to China.
China’s immediate realm is the Pacific. On the other side of the Pacific, it would face Canada and the USA to the east, Australia and NZ in the South. Basically, two entire continents. It would be checked.
India would be our ally here, but also nations like Vietnam, Korea, which are historically wary of, or absolutely hostile to, China.
China’s imperial ambitions are now clear, as is its autocratic ugliness under Xi Jinping. Containing it, and maintaining a balance of power, and therefore peace, along with western freedoms, is a central task for the 21st century
The English speaking nations standing together will be a vital part of this.
No it wouldn't, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand even combined are no match for China and even adding the USA at most comes to a score draw.
India, with the second largest military in the world and soon to be the 3rd largest economy would tip the balance in the West's favour and is pivotal for an alliance to contain China to have real effect
You're mad.
No, that is the reality of the 21st century
No it is not.
India may be allies against China but they won't be integral Anglosphere nations.
Again Five Eyes isn't new it dates back in one form or another to the second world war. In that time we should make the distinction between NATO against the Soviet Union and Five Eyes. Turkey, Greece and West Germany etc were valuable NATO allies but they were not a part of the Anglosphere, they were not in Five Eyes.
India may be in a NATO style alliance against China, but they're not going to be (nor do they desire to be) a part of Five Eyes.
You are setting great store by this Five Eyes. Is it forever fixed at that? What about some ocular expansion to widen the field of vision? There must surely be some strong candidates.
What about India?
If the interests of the nation's line up then yes.
They don't though. India don't view the world the same, they're interested in being their own power in their own right. We're not.
The whole point of the Anglosphere is we've moved on from the UK being a power in its own right to being team players with others.
India is a solo player not a team player. They want to be their own captain. We don't.
And yet as you keep telling us the USA are part of Five Eyes and most certainly are interested in maintaining their position as a power in their own right. I don't see why India should be excluded on this basis. To be fairly blunt about it they also fill a large Geographic hole in any mutual intelligence cooperation system given that of the other members two are basically North America, two are at the bottom end of the Pacific and one is in Europe. India could be a great asset to the system.
India sided with the Soviets during the Cold War. Why should we trust them?
India didn't side with the Soviets. They were one of the founding members of the Non-Aligned movement which aimed to stay neutral in the Cold War. Their main area of agreement with the Soviets was in dealing with China who both saw as an immediate threat.
Anecdota about the vaccine program: I walked to the pharmacy where I had an appointment at 12:15, getting there 20 minutes early as I was unsure where it is and had allowed time to get lost. As soon as I got there they checked my name, DoB and I was ushered into the consulting room (one of two in use) to have the jab there and then. Time taken: under ten minutes. The printed list they signed me off on looked fairly full with few gaps.
I was very impressed with the level of organisation to be honest.
That seems to be the massively overwhelming experience, just how efficient and organized the whole process is. I have to say, I was fully expecting plenty of stories of people who booked turning up and finding they weren't on the list, or somebody messed something up and people ended up waiting 2hrs, etc, because going from nothing to doing 10m people in a couple of months is just a huge task.
Turning up to find I'd been missed off the list was my worry as well, as that happened to me last autumn when I had my flu jab. That was organised locally by the GPs though, while this was a national project.
Anecdota about the vaccine program: I walked to the pharmacy where I had an appointment at 12:15, getting there 20 minutes early as I was unsure where it is and had allowed time to get lost. As soon as I got there they checked my name, DoB and I was ushered into the consulting room (one of two in use) to have the jab there and then. Time taken: under ten minutes. The printed list they signed me off on looked fairly full with few gaps.
I was very impressed with the level of organisation to be honest.
That seems to be the massively overwhelming experience, just how efficient and organized the whole process is. I have to say, I was fully expecting plenty of stories of people who booked turning up and finding they weren't on the list, or somebody messed something up and people ended up waiting 2hrs, etc, because going from nothing to doing 10m people in a couple of months is just a huge task.
Yep - vaccination site at Bath racecourse very slick. I would suggest over zealous on hand sanitiser. I had to do it 4 times between arrival and getting the jab, at no point had I touched anything... And on the way out... I guess the 'fomites are dangerous' thing is still on all the risk assessments (and to be honest its easier to stick with than try to change the messaging now, even though the true risk is aerosol, almost exclusively). You can be sure that if there were problems somewhere, the media would be all over it.
Boris Johnson will lead a Downing Street press conference on coronavirus on Wednesday afternoon.
FFS what for? what's the point?
He can wibble on about holibobs.
That seems to be today's media fixation.
It is perfectly valid to ask about holidays at home and abroad.
Most people are not like the PB Home Bodies and have families who are desperate to get away, whether that be within the UK or abroad.
Nor do I accept the idea that the government is unable to model the situation in July – they will be doing exactly that.
So the press will ask questions. As they should.
PB older, (white?), male, well-off, large house-living, big garden or grounds-owning, non-tower block-living, best vintage of Ch. l'Evangile-discussing contributors say:
Why does everyone keep banging on about holidays? Being at home is perfectly agreeable.
Exactly. It's completely transparent and pretty nauseating.
I find Dr Van Tam's recent comment that the South African variant is not expected to become the dominant form of the virus in the UK in the next few months to be very interesting. We know that the South African variant has a relative advantage over the UK variants in escaping immunity from vaccination and probably recent infection, so why would it not keep growing given that a specific vaccine against it is not currently available and will not be available until the autumn?
Could it be that the plan is essentially to maintain the lockdown in a form similar to now until the new vaccines are rolled out in the autumn, and deployed to most of the population? And even then will the lockdown be lifted, and what if by then there is a further new variant?
My guess, FWIW, is that the UK plans to use AZ for first shots, but hopefully to move onto Pfizer (or in a few cases Moderna) for the second, with CureVac for Autumn boosters.
Pfizer has massively increased its production plans for this year: in January they said they'd make 1.2 billion doses this year, and they're now saying 2 billion.
I also think they are planning on getting cases very low before releasing and the then the better weather, plus vaccines, plus huge testing resource and seemingly now better T and T at the local level will be able to cope. If we had let things run with the SA variant, I think it could have been a different story.
Boris Johnson will lead a Downing Street press conference on coronavirus on Wednesday afternoon.
FFS what for? what's the point?
He can wibble on about holibobs.
That seems to be today's media fixation.
It is perfectly valid to ask about holidays at home and abroad.
Most people are not like the PB Home Bodies and have families who are desperate to get away, whether that be within the UK or abroad.
Nor do I accept the idea that the government is unable to model the situation in July – they will be doing exactly that.
So the press will ask questions. As they should.
PB older, (white?), male, well-off, large house-living, big garden or grounds-owning, non-tower block-living, best vintage of Ch. l'Evangile-discussing contributors say:
Why does everyone keep banging on about holidays? Being at home is perfectly agreeable.
Well, speaking as a well-off, older, white male, Penfolds Hermitage-loving PB-er I am desperate to get out of the country, and feel real hot sun on my face, and yet even more desperate for lockdown to end, so my kids can resume normal life.
I see the damage being done, to all of us. Even if it all stops tomorrow, the scars will last for a generation
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
Yes, we're establishing a secret society in a treehouse we built, and we're having a "No Indias" policy.
That's the vibe I'm getting. The Famous Five (eyes) and nobody else.
The chaps you can trust.
It's how we've operated for the past eighty years, yes.
What of it? That's the point of alliances.
Why be anchored to the past? And why be so insular and timid as to work with only 4 other eyes. It's a great big modern 21st century world out there. This perception was supposedly the reason to leave the EU. Yet as soon as we escape you want us to limit our horizons to a retro fantasy about the "Anglosphere". It makes no sense except on one level - a level which tolerates no scrutiny without those being scrutinized getting all snowflakey and slamming down the "are you accusing me of being a racist?" card.
We shouldn't only work with the other 4.
As I keep saying NATO has been an extremely valuable alliance. But there is and has been for eighty years a core alliance that goes further and deeper than NATO. I fully expect that to continue.
We should be allies with as many friendly nations as we can be. We should be trading partners with as many friendly economies as we can be.
Anecdota about the vaccine program: I walked to the pharmacy where I had an appointment at 12:15, getting there 20 minutes early as I was unsure where it is and had allowed time to get lost. As soon as I got there they checked my name, DoB and I was ushered into the consulting room (one of two in use) to have the jab there and then. Time taken: under ten minutes. The printed list they signed me off on looked fairly full with few gaps.
I was very impressed with the level of organisation to be honest.
Congratulations on having the vaccine! I hope you have no side effects.
The current side-effect of the vaccine appears to involve looking at the Conservatives in a better light... 😉
Boris Johnson will lead a Downing Street press conference on coronavirus on Wednesday afternoon.
FFS what for? what's the point?
He can wibble on about holibobs.
That seems to be today's media fixation.
If you were in the hospitality industry, in any capacity and at any level, and you listened to Grant Schapps incredible and nonsensical statement, you would absolutely despair.
Seriously what is the point in running a business in hospitality, or travel, at all?
you may as well absolutely give up.
Exactly right. The questions are perfectly valid. Why do @SandyRentool and @FrancisUrquhart believe them to be invalid?
My issue is they ask it every time and the answer is we just don't know. Nothing will have changed radically from last week. We need to see the effects of the vaccination programme and even then, given the variants there needs to be more information.
To me it sounds like a child asking 'are we nearly there yet'?
Except this is worse, because we don't even know how far we have to go.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
I never said that.
I said that India don't want to be in the Anglosphere. There's a difference.
India will work with us when it's in their interests. Their interests are aligned when it comes to China but not as much on other issues.
That's why they're not a part of Five Eyes today - what I want is neither here nor there.
Well I've just had a quick chat with India and they say if there is to be an Anglosphere - which they are skeptical of tbf - they do at least want to be asked if they'd like to be in it.
You're skeptical?
There already is one and it dates back to World War Two. Which part of the past 80 years are you skeptical of?
I'm talking about the new and improved version you Brexit nostalgics are dreaming of which is soon to become a global power player to rival US, Europe & China. The retro fantasy with a white supremacy vibe. That one.
You really do slip into a very strange fantasy world sometimes.
The fantasy here is the 'Anglosphere to rival US, China, Europe' one. I see you have not succumbed to it despite being an ardent Leaver. So hats off for that.
As the Anglosphere includes the US I don't understand what point you think you are making.
Anecdota about the vaccine program: I walked to the pharmacy where I had an appointment at 12:15, getting there 20 minutes early as I was unsure where it is and had allowed time to get lost. As soon as I got there they checked my name, DoB and I was ushered into the consulting room (one of two in use) to have the jab there and then. Time taken: under ten minutes. The printed list they signed me off on looked fairly full with few gaps.
I was very impressed with the level of organisation to be honest.
Congratulations on having the vaccine! I hope you have no side effects.
The current side-effect of the vaccine appears to involve looking at the Conservatives in a better light... 😉
That's a very dangerous side effect, given this information these vaccines should be banned immediately. Before you know it, they might be full on baby eaters.
Boris Johnson will lead a Downing Street press conference on coronavirus on Wednesday afternoon.
FFS what for? what's the point?
He can wibble on about holibobs.
That seems to be today's media fixation.
It is perfectly valid to ask about holidays at home and abroad.
Most people are not like the PB Home Bodies and have families who are desperate to get away, whether that be within the UK or abroad.
Nor do I accept the idea that the government is unable to model the situation in July – they will be doing exactly that.
So the press will ask questions. As they should.
PB older, (white?), male, well-off, large house-living, big garden or grounds-owning, non-tower block-living, best vintage of Ch. l'Evangile-discussing contributors say:
Why does everyone keep banging on about holidays? Being at home is perfectly agreeable.
You've just described those who are banging on about going skiing.....
Anecdota about the vaccine program: I walked to the pharmacy where I had an appointment at 12:15, getting there 20 minutes early as I was unsure where it is and had allowed time to get lost. As soon as I got there they checked my name, DoB and I was ushered into the consulting room (one of two in use) to have the jab there and then. Time taken: under ten minutes. The printed list they signed me off on looked fairly full with few gaps.
I was very impressed with the level of organisation to be honest.
Congratulations on having the vaccine! I hope you have no side effects.
The current side-effect of the vaccine appears to involve looking at the Conservatives in a better light... 😉
That's a very dangerous side effect, given this information these vaccines should be banned immediately. Before you know it, they might be full on baby eaters.
It's clearly what drives the EU's decision to rubbish them....
Boris Johnson will lead a Downing Street press conference on coronavirus on Wednesday afternoon.
FFS what for? what's the point?
He can wibble on about holibobs.
That seems to be today's media fixation.
If you were in the hospitality industry, in any capacity and at any level, and you listened to Grant Schapps incredible and nonsensical statement, you would absolutely despair.
Seriously what is the point in running a business in hospitality, or travel, at all?
you may as well absolutely give up.
Exactly right. The questions are perfectly valid. Why do @SandyRentool and @FrancisUrquhart believe them to be invalid?
My issue is they ask it every time and the answer is we just don't know. Nothing will have changed radically from last week. We need to see the effects of the vaccination programme and even then, given the variants there needs to be more information.
To me it sounds like a child asking 'are we nearly there yet'?
Except this is worse, because we don't even know how far we have to go.
Boris Johnson will lead a Downing Street press conference on coronavirus on Wednesday afternoon.
FFS what for? what's the point?
He can wibble on about holibobs.
That seems to be today's media fixation.
It is perfectly valid to ask about holidays at home and abroad.
Most people are not like the PB Home Bodies and have families who are desperate to get away, whether that be within the UK or abroad.
Nor do I accept the idea that the government is unable to model the situation in July – they will be doing exactly that.
So the press will ask questions. As they should.
PB older, (white?), male, well-off, large house-living, big garden or grounds-owning, non-tower block-living, best vintage of Ch. l'Evangile-discussing contributors say:
Why does everyone keep banging on about holidays? Being at home is perfectly agreeable.
You've just described those who are banging on about going skiing.....
It would be a brave PB-er, what with the @SandyRentools and @FrancisUrquharts on patrol, who organised a piss-up at the Farm Club.
I see the Lib Dems are applying their bar chart skills to maps now.
The scale is fine. It's consistent, and it does a reasonable job at distinguishing between countries doing "well", "not so well" and "badly". The relative sizes of the countries is an issue, but hardly their fault. Not everything has to be a simple linear scale.
No it's not. Suggesting the difference between 10% and 30% is the same as the difference between 0.1% and 0.3% is absolutely ridiculous.
I'd ditch the first two gradations (ie less than 1%, which are ridiculous), and I'd probably switch from base 3 to base 5 or 10, but that's about it.
I think you're assuming it should show that the UK is miles ahead of the EU, which is as biased as wanting it to show the opposite. The truth is that we're comfortably ahead, but there are plenty of other countries which are much further behind still. Which is exactly what the graphic shows.
A linear gradation would show that just fine.
If it was 0-10% and 10-20%, we'd be one bucket up from most of the EU, exactly as we are now.
Edit: possibly we have just crept over into the third bucket, but it still wouldn't provide a useful way of distinguishing between those who have barely started (~1%), and those off to an excellent start (~5-9%).
You'd change the minimum/maximum, or have a continuous colour scale rather than bins. Having a discrete colour scheme should be used for discrete datasets only.
No disagreement from me, but those continuous scales aren't easy to work with. I assume the format choice is driven by that fact, and a desire to have the whole world shown consistently, rather than an attempt to hide the EU's failings (it's from the "Our World in Data" website).
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
I never said that.
I said that India don't want to be in the Anglosphere. There's a difference.
India will work with us when it's in their interests. Their interests are aligned when it comes to China but not as much on other issues.
That's why they're not a part of Five Eyes today - what I want is neither here nor there.
Well I've just had a quick chat with India and they say if there is to be an Anglosphere - which they are skeptical of tbf - they do at least want to be asked if they'd like to be in it.
You're skeptical?
There already is one and it dates back to World War Two. Which part of the past 80 years are you skeptical of?
I'm talking about the new and improved version you Brexit nostalgics are dreaming of which is soon to become a global power player to rival US, Europe & China. The retro fantasy with a white supremacy vibe. That one.
You really do slip into a very strange fantasy world sometimes.
The fantasy here is the 'Anglosphere to rival US, China, Europe' one. I see you have not succumbed to it despite being an ardent Leaver. So hats off for that.
As the Anglosphere includes the US I don't understand what point you think you are making.
Its remarkable that Kinabalu keeps trying to insist that we along with the USA must be rivals to the USA. You'd think anyone would think that's entirely illogical.
The only thing that can make sense out of it is if he's so illogically extreme that like Corbyn he views the USA as our rival and not our ally so is trying to build an anti-American alliance in his head and can't reconcile the two thoughts.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
I never said that.
I said that India don't want to be in the Anglosphere. There's a difference.
India will work with us when it's in their interests. Their interests are aligned when it comes to China but not as much on other issues.
That's why they're not a part of Five Eyes today - what I want is neither here nor there.
Well I've just had a quick chat with India and they say if there is to be an Anglosphere - which they are skeptical of tbf - they do at least want to be asked if they'd like to be in it.
You're skeptical?
There already is one and it dates back to World War Two. Which part of the past 80 years are you skeptical of?
I'm talking about the new and improved version you Brexit nostalgics are dreaming of which is soon to become a global power player to rival US, Europe & China. The retro fantasy with a white supremacy vibe. That one.
You really do slip into a very strange fantasy world sometimes.
The fantasy here is the 'Anglosphere to rival US, China, Europe' one. I see you have not succumbed to it despite being an ardent Leaver. So hats off for that.
If you are going to try and argue a point then do at least please try and get your basic facts right. The USA are part of the Anglosphere. For the moment anyway. So, I would contend, although others might disagree, are India.
The logarithmic scale on the chart is an "interesting" approach. You really don't need a log scale when scores are between 0 and 100. Unless of course you want to hide the vast differences between countries...
Did Comical Ali rename himself Dave Keating?
The positive spin is there are no pricks in the EU!
Anecdota about the vaccine program: I walked to the pharmacy where I had an appointment at 12:15, getting there 20 minutes early as I was unsure where it is and had allowed time to get lost. As soon as I got there they checked my name, DoB and I was ushered into the consulting room (one of two in use) to have the jab there and then. Time taken: under ten minutes. The printed list they signed me off on looked fairly full with few gaps.
I was very impressed with the level of organisation to be honest.
Congratulations on having the vaccine! I hope you have no side effects.
Out of interest do any of our medical experts know whether a person's reaction to the vaccine would be indicative of their reaction to getting the actual infection?
I find Dr Van Tam's recent comment that the South African variant is not expected to become the dominant form of the virus in the UK in the next few months to be very interesting. We know that the South African variant has a relative advantage over the UK variants in escaping immunity from vaccination and probably recent infection, so why would it not keep growing given that a specific vaccine against it is not currently available and will not be available until the autumn?
Could it be that the plan is essentially to maintain the lockdown in a form similar to now until the new vaccines are rolled out in the autumn, and deployed to most of the population? And even then will the lockdown be lifted, and what if by then there is a further new variant?
My guess, FWIW, is that the UK plans to use AZ for first shots, but hopefully to move onto Pfizer (or in a few cases Moderna) for the second, with CureVac for Autumn boosters.
Pfizer has massively increased its production plans for this year: in January they said they'd make 1.2 billion doses this year, and they're now saying 2 billion.
Summer 2020 saw very low case rates per day and almost no serious illness, even with relatively scant acquired immunity, no vaccination, inferior treatments, the A303 nose to tail with holiday makers, casual flying, and Vodka Revolutions happily churning out shots slabs.
Notwithstanding saffa covid, one imagines the UK will generally be a less conducive place for a sars-cov2 virus to go forth and prosper this summer than last, no matter how far the government loosens things.
So one would hope we could quite easily have some semblance of normality this summer, followed by a lightning programme of mRNA boosters in time for Back To School. Shapps’ comments today about domestic hospitality / tourism puts him in the same “unfit for public office” box as so many of the rest of them.
Boris Johnson will lead a Downing Street press conference on coronavirus on Wednesday afternoon.
FFS what for? what's the point?
He can wibble on about holibobs.
That seems to be today's media fixation.
It is perfectly valid to ask about holidays at home and abroad.
Most people are not like the PB Home Bodies and have families who are desperate to get away, whether that be within the UK or abroad.
Nor do I accept the idea that the government is unable to model the situation in July – they will be doing exactly that.
So the press will ask questions. As they should.
PB older, (white?), male, well-off, large house-living, big garden or grounds-owning, non-tower block-living, best vintage of Ch. l'Evangile-discussing contributors say:
Why does everyone keep banging on about holidays? Being at home is perfectly agreeable.
And yet for many of those tower block living, non-wine swilling folks you talk of, holiday means swapping living in a set of small rooms on the 17th floor of a tower block in Birmingham for a few hours crammed into a plane and then 2 weeks living in a small room in a tower block in Spain.
If you are really concerned about their well being then stop making cheap points about holidays and start making serious points about their access to parks and the countryside without being hassled by the authorities.
Anecdota about the vaccine program: I walked to the pharmacy where I had an appointment at 12:15, getting there 20 minutes early as I was unsure where it is and had allowed time to get lost. As soon as I got there they checked my name, DoB and I was ushered into the consulting room (one of two in use) to have the jab there and then. Time taken: under ten minutes. The printed list they signed me off on looked fairly full with few gaps.
I was very impressed with the level of organisation to be honest.
Congratulations on having the vaccine! I hope you have no side effects.
The current side-effect of the vaccine appears to involve looking at the Conservatives in a better light... 😉
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
You're missing one critical thing here. Does anyone in the "Anglosphere" other than Britain want that level of formality and political integration?
Because if not this entire discussion is academic.
It does seem like there is appetite for it. Look at how quickly the UK has been asked to join the CP-TPP by Canada and Australia in particular and I expect once we're in the US won't be far behind.
Even the Five Eyes intelligence network has clearly begun coordinating some foreign policy wrt China.
The UK leaving the EU is much bigger in global context than people realised. Losing the UK from the EU has meant the EU has pursued a hugely different policy towards China and Russia it would not have been able to do with the UK in it. That makes the EU a much less important ally to the US and makes the special relationship and reliable allies such as Canada and Australia much more important to our goals and to the goals of the US.
It's not about political integration, it's about shared foreign policy aims wrt China (and Russia). No one wants to become the 51st state or have a joint political decision making process with any other nation, but we all recognise that the English speaking countries have a fairly similar world outlook and we can ultimately all rely on each other. When the UK needed trade negotiators we asked New Zealand and Canada to help train ours having been out of the game for decades. When we needed international coordination over HK we went to the US, Canada, NZ and Oz as our first phonecall. When the US wanted coordination over keeping Chinese state owned technology out of western supply chains, they came to the UK, Canada and Australia.
You might not like it but our aims out of the EU are no longer aligned with the EU. We will need to treat the relationship as a transactional one, not as one between allies. We can see that they already see it as transactional, I think there is a realisation in Westminster that we need to do the same and rely on our old friends in the world to support each others policy aims.
In reference to your last paragraph, I'm not sure that's fair. I've been very open to the fact that I support membership of CPTPP and deeper ties with CANZUK in response to us leaving the EU. My concern and question, although not worded very thoroughly, was to the level of "deeper ties".
Trade is one thing, and I know that Brits on the whole would love having more "free movement" style arrangements with CANZUK for example, but I doubt there's the same clamour over there. Especially when our population is pushing more than the rest combined.
Free movement is unlikely but is endorsed by some in all the nations concerned. Notably of course CANZUK excludes the USA.
There's a difference though between viewing these as our closest allies and going as far as free movement.
So when we say "deeper ties with CANZUK" what we basically mean is "trade deals and foreign policy objectives".
That's fine but it's a long way from political integration on the level seen by the EU and it remains to be seen what the economic benefit of that will be.
What will be interesting is whether republicanism jumps once QEII passes away and the effect (if any) that will have on cultural ties and goodwill.
@HYUFD for example seems to treat rejection of the monarchy as a personal insult.
Of course he does. The English State as based on the Henrician settlement and Charles I's view of Divine Right (which the Scots rejected).
Seriously, though, the ascension of Charles III to the throne will see a rise in republicanism and not just on the other wide of the world - not his fault so much as who he is not. And more generally it will have a very unsettling effect on the 'British' political Weltanschauung as old institutions seem less fixed after all.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
You're missing one critical thing here. Does anyone in the "Anglosphere" other than Britain want that level of formality and political integration?
Because if not this entire discussion is academic.
It does seem like there is appetite for it. Look at how quickly the UK has been asked to join the CP-TPP by Canada and Australia in particular and I expect once we're in the US won't be far behind.
Even the Five Eyes intelligence network has clearly begun coordinating some foreign policy wrt China.
The UK leaving the EU is much bigger in global context than people realised. Losing the UK from the EU has meant the EU has pursued a hugely different policy towards China and Russia it would not have been able to do with the UK in it. That makes the EU a much less important ally to the US and makes the special relationship and reliable allies such as Canada and Australia much more important to our goals and to the goals of the US.
It's not about political integration, it's about shared foreign policy aims wrt China (and Russia). No one wants to become the 51st state or have a joint political decision making process with any other nation, but we all recognise that the English speaking countries have a fairly similar world outlook and we can ultimately all rely on each other. When the UK needed trade negotiators we asked New Zealand and Canada to help train ours having been out of the game for decades. When we needed international coordination over HK we went to the US, Canada, NZ and Oz as our first phonecall. When the US wanted coordination over keeping Chinese state owned technology out of western supply chains, they came to the UK, Canada and Australia.
You might not like it but our aims out of the EU are no longer aligned with the EU. We will need to treat the relationship as a transactional one, not as one between allies. We can see that they already see it as transactional, I think there is a realisation in Westminster that we need to do the same and rely on our old friends in the world to support each others policy aims.
In reference to your last paragraph, I'm not sure that's fair. I've been very open to the fact that I support membership of CPTPP and deeper ties with CANZUK in response to us leaving the EU. My concern and question, although not worded very thoroughly, was to the level of "deeper ties".
Trade is one thing, and I know that Brits on the whole would love having more "free movement" style arrangements with CANZUK for example, but I doubt there's the same clamour over there. Especially when our population is pushing more than the rest combined.
Free movement is unlikely but is endorsed by some in all the nations concerned. Notably of course CANZUK excludes the USA.
There's a difference though between viewing these as our closest allies and going as far as free movement.
So when we say "deeper ties with CANZUK" what we basically mean is "trade deals and foreign policy objectives".
That's fine but it's a long way from political integration on the level seen by the EU and it remains to be seen what the economic benefit of that will be.
What will be interesting is whether republicanism jumps once QEII passes away and the effect (if any) that will have on cultural ties and goodwill.
@HYUFD for example seems to treat rejection of the monarchy as a personal insult.
Of course he does. The English State as based on the Henrician settlement and Charles I's view of Divine Right (which the Scots rejected).
Seriously, though, the ascension of Charles III to the throne will see a rise in republicanism and not just on the other wide of the world - not his fault so much as who he is not. And more generally it will have a very unsettling effect on the 'British' political Weltanschauung as old institutions seem less fixed after all.
Can't see it. George V was a clapped out successor to an everlasting and popular female monarch - he was marginalised and not greatly admired when he was the heir. But he became a very popular monarch in his short reign and was remembered very fondly.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
You're missing one critical thing here. Does anyone in the "Anglosphere" other than Britain want that level of formality and political integration?
Because if not this entire discussion is academic.
It does seem like there is appetite for it. Look at how quickly the UK has been asked to join the CP-TPP by Canada and Australia in particular and I expect once we're in the US won't be far behind.
Even the Five Eyes intelligence network has clearly begun coordinating some foreign policy wrt China.
The UK leaving the EU is much bigger in global context than people realised. Losing the UK from the EU has meant the EU has pursued a hugely different policy towards China and Russia it would not have been able to do with the UK in it. That makes the EU a much less important ally to the US and makes the special relationship and reliable allies such as Canada and Australia much more important to our goals and to the goals of the US.
It's not about political integration, it's about shared foreign policy aims wrt China (and Russia). No one wants to become the 51st state or have a joint political decision making process with any other nation, but we all recognise that the English speaking countries have a fairly similar world outlook and we can ultimately all rely on each other. When the UK needed trade negotiators we asked New Zealand and Canada to help train ours having been out of the game for decades. When we needed international coordination over HK we went to the US, Canada, NZ and Oz as our first phonecall. When the US wanted coordination over keeping Chinese state owned technology out of western supply chains, they came to the UK, Canada and Australia.
You might not like it but our aims out of the EU are no longer aligned with the EU. We will need to treat the relationship as a transactional one, not as one between allies. We can see that they already see it as transactional, I think there is a realisation in Westminster that we need to do the same and rely on our old friends in the world to support each others policy aims.
In reference to your last paragraph, I'm not sure that's fair. I've been very open to the fact that I support membership of CPTPP and deeper ties with CANZUK in response to us leaving the EU. My concern and question, although not worded very thoroughly, was to the level of "deeper ties".
Trade is one thing, and I know that Brits on the whole would love having more "free movement" style arrangements with CANZUK for example, but I doubt there's the same clamour over there. Especially when our population is pushing more than the rest combined.
Free movement is unlikely but is endorsed by some in all the nations concerned. Notably of course CANZUK excludes the USA.
There's a difference though between viewing these as our closest allies and going as far as free movement.
So when we say "deeper ties with CANZUK" what we basically mean is "trade deals and foreign policy objectives".
That's fine but it's a long way from political integration on the level seen by the EU and it remains to be seen what the economic benefit of that will be.
What will be interesting is whether republicanism jumps once QEII passes away and the effect (if any) that will have on cultural ties and goodwill.
@HYUFD for example seems to treat rejection of the monarchy as a personal insult.
Of course he does. The English State as based on the Henrician settlement and Charles I's view of Divine Right (which the Scots rejected).
Seriously, though, the ascension of Charles III to the throne will see a rise in republicanism and not just on the other wide of the world - not his fault so much as who he is not. And more generally it will have a very unsettling effect on the 'British' political Weltanschauung as old institutions seem less fixed after all.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
You're missing one critical thing here. Does anyone in the "Anglosphere" other than Britain want that level of formality and political integration?
Because if not this entire discussion is academic.
It does seem like there is appetite for it. Look at how quickly the UK has been asked to join the CP-TPP by Canada and Australia in particular and I expect once we're in the US won't be far behind.
Even the Five Eyes intelligence network has clearly begun coordinating some foreign policy wrt China.
The UK leaving the EU is much bigger in global context than people realised. Losing the UK from the EU has meant the EU has pursued a hugely different policy towards China and Russia it would not have been able to do with the UK in it. That makes the EU a much less important ally to the US and makes the special relationship and reliable allies such as Canada and Australia much more important to our goals and to the goals of the US.
It's not about political integration, it's about shared foreign policy aims wrt China (and Russia). No one wants to become the 51st state or have a joint political decision making process with any other nation, but we all recognise that the English speaking countries have a fairly similar world outlook and we can ultimately all rely on each other. When the UK needed trade negotiators we asked New Zealand and Canada to help train ours having been out of the game for decades. When we needed international coordination over HK we went to the US, Canada, NZ and Oz as our first phonecall. When the US wanted coordination over keeping Chinese state owned technology out of western supply chains, they came to the UK, Canada and Australia.
You might not like it but our aims out of the EU are no longer aligned with the EU. We will need to treat the relationship as a transactional one, not as one between allies. We can see that they already see it as transactional, I think there is a realisation in Westminster that we need to do the same and rely on our old friends in the world to support each others policy aims.
In reference to your last paragraph, I'm not sure that's fair. I've been very open to the fact that I support membership of CPTPP and deeper ties with CANZUK in response to us leaving the EU. My concern and question, although not worded very thoroughly, was to the level of "deeper ties".
Trade is one thing, and I know that Brits on the whole would love having more "free movement" style arrangements with CANZUK for example, but I doubt there's the same clamour over there. Especially when our population is pushing more than the rest combined.
Free movement is unlikely but is endorsed by some in all the nations concerned. Notably of course CANZUK excludes the USA.
There's a difference though between viewing these as our closest allies and going as far as free movement.
So when we say "deeper ties with CANZUK" what we basically mean is "trade deals and foreign policy objectives".
That's fine but it's a long way from political integration on the level seen by the EU and it remains to be seen what the economic benefit of that will be.
What will be interesting is whether republicanism jumps once QEII passes away and the effect (if any) that will have on cultural ties and goodwill.
@HYUFD for example seems to treat rejection of the monarchy as a personal insult.
Of course he does. The English State as based on the Henrician settlement and Charles I's view of Divine Right (which the Scots rejected).
Seriously, though, the ascension of Charles III to the throne will see a rise in republicanism and not just on the other wide of the world - not his fault so much as who he is not. And more generally it will have a very unsettling effect on the 'British' political Weltanschauung as old institutions seem less fixed after all.
Can't see it. George V was a clapped out successor to an everlasting and popular female monarch - he was marginalised and not greatly admired when he was the heir. But he became a very popular monarch in his short reign and was remembered very fondly.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
The "Anglosphere".
A racist retro fantasy.
Racist?
Only if you are willing to call the European Union a racist retro fantasy.
You're delving further and further into hypocrisy every passing day.
Non-sequitur ad homini deflectibus is no match for the truth.
The truth is that the Anglosphere is real and has been for decades. It's not new or a fantasy.
Five Eyes, which is the Anglosphere nations, dates back to World War Two.
It's not just older than the European Union, it's not just older the Single Market, it's not just older than the European Economic Community . . . It is even older than the European Coal and Steel Community.
So yes your dismissing an eighty year old alliance as a racist fantasy is a total non sequitur and not the truth.
Yep. It's real. Very much so. Echoes of Empire live on and there is indeed Five Eyes. "The chaps you can trust." But to believe this will form the basis of a 21st century global power bloc to rival US, Europe, China - and to wish for this to happen - IS a retro fantasy. That's an unimprovable description. And, yes, such a fantasy IS tinged with racism for many of those who indulge in it. This is the plain & simple truth of the matter. There's no tetch or stretch.
Why would Five Eyes rival the US?
The US is a part of Five Eyes not it's rival.
The rest of your rant is hypocritical gibberish.
So we're down to 4 eyes then. Oh dear. That's going to get bullied in the playground.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
I never said that.
I said that India don't want to be in the Anglosphere. There's a difference.
India will work with us when it's in their interests. Their interests are aligned when it comes to China but not as much on other issues.
That's why they're not a part of Five Eyes today - what I want is neither here nor there.
Well I've just had a quick chat with India and they say if there is to be an Anglosphere - which they are skeptical of tbf - they do at least want to be asked if they'd like to be in it.
You're skeptical?
There already is one and it dates back to World War Two. Which part of the past 80 years are you skeptical of?
I'm talking about the new and improved version you Brexit nostalgics are dreaming of which is soon to become a global power player to rival US, Europe & China. The retro fantasy with a white supremacy vibe. That one.
The USA is part of the Anglosphere you screaming dumb f*ck. How can it not be? Otherwise, you aced that comment
Seizes on unimportant point of detail and lashes out due to being exposed as supporter of retro fantasy.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
I never said that.
I said that India don't want to be in the Anglosphere. There's a difference.
India will work with us when it's in their interests. Their interests are aligned when it comes to China but not as much on other issues.
That's why they're not a part of Five Eyes today - what I want is neither here nor there.
Well I've just had a quick chat with India and they say if there is to be an Anglosphere - which they are skeptical of tbf - they do at least want to be asked if they'd like to be in it.
You're skeptical?
There already is one and it dates back to World War Two. Which part of the past 80 years are you skeptical of?
I'm talking about the new and improved version you Brexit nostalgics are dreaming of which is soon to become a global power player to rival US, Europe & China. The retro fantasy with a white supremacy vibe. That one.
You really do slip into a very strange fantasy world sometimes.
The fantasy here is the 'Anglosphere to rival US, China, Europe' one. I see you have not succumbed to it despite being an ardent Leaver. So hats off for that.
As the Anglosphere includes the US I don't understand what point you think you are making.
The notion that Brexit will birth a new and coherent global power bloc comprising the White Commonwealth plus America is a retro fantasy tinged with white supremacy racism. This is the point I both think I'm making and am making.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
I never said that.
I said that India don't want to be in the Anglosphere. There's a difference.
India will work with us when it's in their interests. Their interests are aligned when it comes to China but not as much on other issues.
That's why they're not a part of Five Eyes today - what I want is neither here nor there.
Well I've just had a quick chat with India and they say if there is to be an Anglosphere - which they are skeptical of tbf - they do at least want to be asked if they'd like to be in it.
You're skeptical?
There already is one and it dates back to World War Two. Which part of the past 80 years are you skeptical of?
I'm talking about the new and improved version you Brexit nostalgics are dreaming of which is soon to become a global power player to rival US, Europe & China. The retro fantasy with a white supremacy vibe. That one.
You really do slip into a very strange fantasy world sometimes.
The fantasy here is the 'Anglosphere to rival US, China, Europe' one. I see you have not succumbed to it despite being an ardent Leaver. So hats off for that.
If you are going to try and argue a point then do at least please try and get your basic facts right. The USA are part of the Anglosphere. For the moment anyway. So, I would contend, although others might disagree, are India.
I know. The Anglosphere Brexit nostalgiacs fantasize about becoming a new global bloc is America plus the White Commonwealth.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
You're missing one critical thing here. Does anyone in the "Anglosphere" other than Britain want that level of formality and political integration?
Because if not this entire discussion is academic.
It does seem like there is appetite for it. Look at how quickly the UK has been asked to join the CP-TPP by Canada and Australia in particular and I expect once we're in the US won't be far behind.
Even the Five Eyes intelligence network has clearly begun coordinating some foreign policy wrt China.
The UK leaving the EU is much bigger in global context than people realised. Losing the UK from the EU has meant the EU has pursued a hugely different policy towards China and Russia it would not have been able to do with the UK in it. That makes the EU a much less important ally to the US and makes the special relationship and reliable allies such as Canada and Australia much more important to our goals and to the goals of the US.
It's not about political integration, it's about shared foreign policy aims wrt China (and Russia). No one wants to become the 51st state or have a joint political decision making process with any other nation, but we all recognise that the English speaking countries have a fairly similar world outlook and we can ultimately all rely on each other. When the UK needed trade negotiators we asked New Zealand and Canada to help train ours having been out of the game for decades. When we needed international coordination over HK we went to the US, Canada, NZ and Oz as our first phonecall. When the US wanted coordination over keeping Chinese state owned technology out of western supply chains, they came to the UK, Canada and Australia.
You might not like it but our aims out of the EU are no longer aligned with the EU. We will need to treat the relationship as a transactional one, not as one between allies. We can see that they already see it as transactional, I think there is a realisation in Westminster that we need to do the same and rely on our old friends in the world to support each others policy aims.
In reference to your last paragraph, I'm not sure that's fair. I've been very open to the fact that I support membership of CPTPP and deeper ties with CANZUK in response to us leaving the EU. My concern and question, although not worded very thoroughly, was to the level of "deeper ties".
Trade is one thing, and I know that Brits on the whole would love having more "free movement" style arrangements with CANZUK for example, but I doubt there's the same clamour over there. Especially when our population is pushing more than the rest combined.
Free movement is unlikely but is endorsed by some in all the nations concerned. Notably of course CANZUK excludes the USA.
There's a difference though between viewing these as our closest allies and going as far as free movement.
So when we say "deeper ties with CANZUK" what we basically mean is "trade deals and foreign policy objectives".
That's fine but it's a long way from political integration on the level seen by the EU and it remains to be seen what the economic benefit of that will be.
What will be interesting is whether republicanism jumps once QEII passes away and the effect (if any) that will have on cultural ties and goodwill.
@HYUFD for example seems to treat rejection of the monarchy as a personal insult.
Of course he does. The English State as based on the Henrician settlement and Charles I's view of Divine Right (which the Scots rejected).
Seriously, though, the ascension of Charles III to the throne will see a rise in republicanism and not just on the other wide of the world - not his fault so much as who he is not. And more generally it will have a very unsettling effect on the 'British' political Weltanschauung as old institutions seem less fixed after all.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
You're missing one critical thing here. Does anyone in the "Anglosphere" other than Britain want that level of formality and political integration?
Because if not this entire discussion is academic.
It does seem like there is appetite for it. Look at how quickly the UK has been asked to join the CP-TPP by Canada and Australia in particular and I expect once we're in the US won't be far behind.
Even the Five Eyes intelligence network has clearly begun coordinating some foreign policy wrt China.
The UK leaving the EU is much bigger in global context than people realised. Losing the UK from the EU has meant the EU has pursued a hugely different policy towards China and Russia it would not have been able to do with the UK in it. That makes the EU a much less important ally to the US and makes the special relationship and reliable allies such as Canada and Australia much more important to our goals and to the goals of the US.
It's not about political integration, it's about shared foreign policy aims wrt China (and Russia). No one wants to become the 51st state or have a joint political decision making process with any other nation, but we all recognise that the English speaking countries have a fairly similar world outlook and we can ultimately all rely on each other. When the UK needed trade negotiators we asked New Zealand and Canada to help train ours having been out of the game for decades. When we needed international coordination over HK we went to the US, Canada, NZ and Oz as our first phonecall. When the US wanted coordination over keeping Chinese state owned technology out of western supply chains, they came to the UK, Canada and Australia.
You might not like it but our aims out of the EU are no longer aligned with the EU. We will need to treat the relationship as a transactional one, not as one between allies. We can see that they already see it as transactional, I think there is a realisation in Westminster that we need to do the same and rely on our old friends in the world to support each others policy aims.
In reference to your last paragraph, I'm not sure that's fair. I've been very open to the fact that I support membership of CPTPP and deeper ties with CANZUK in response to us leaving the EU. My concern and question, although not worded very thoroughly, was to the level of "deeper ties".
Trade is one thing, and I know that Brits on the whole would love having more "free movement" style arrangements with CANZUK for example, but I doubt there's the same clamour over there. Especially when our population is pushing more than the rest combined.
Free movement is unlikely but is endorsed by some in all the nations concerned. Notably of course CANZUK excludes the USA.
There's a difference though between viewing these as our closest allies and going as far as free movement.
So when we say "deeper ties with CANZUK" what we basically mean is "trade deals and foreign policy objectives".
That's fine but it's a long way from political integration on the level seen by the EU and it remains to be seen what the economic benefit of that will be.
What will be interesting is whether republicanism jumps once QEII passes away and the effect (if any) that will have on cultural ties and goodwill.
@HYUFD for example seems to treat rejection of the monarchy as a personal insult.
Of course he does. The English State as based on the Henrician settlement and Charles I's view of Divine Right (which the Scots rejected).
Seriously, though, the ascension of Charles III to the throne will see a rise in republicanism and not just on the other wide of the world - not his fault so much as who he is not. And more generally it will have a very unsettling effect on the 'British' political Weltanschauung as old institutions seem less fixed after all.
Can't see it. George V was a clapped out successor to an everlasting and popular female monarch - he was marginalised and not greatly admired when he was the heir. But he became a very popular monarch in his short reign and was remembered very fondly.
Comments
Pfizer has massively increased its production plans for this year: in January they said they'd make 1.2 billion doses this year, and they're now saying 2 billion.
What next should the Rolling Stones rival Mick Jagger?
Should Queen rival Brian May?
That was organised locally by the GPs though, while this was a national project.
I guess the 'fomites are dangerous' thing is still on all the risk assessments (and to be honest its easier to stick with than try to change the messaging now, even though the true risk is aerosol, almost exclusively).
You can be sure that if there were problems somewhere, the media would be all over it.
https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1359509697510989828
I see the damage being done, to all of us. Even if it all stops tomorrow, the scars will last for a generation
As I keep saying NATO has been an extremely valuable alliance. But there is and has been for eighty years a core alliance that goes further and deeper than NATO. I fully expect that to continue.
We should be allies with as many friendly nations as we can be. We should be trading partners with as many friendly economies as we can be.
But some alliances go deeper than others.
Except this is worse, because we don't even know how far we have to go.
The only thing that can make sense out of it is if he's so illogically extreme that like Corbyn he views the USA as our rival and not our ally so is trying to build an anti-American alliance in his head and can't reconcile the two thoughts.
https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1359502053110927360?s=20
https://twitter.com/halsrethink/status/1359499499031437315?s=21
Awesome work Sean
But I don't think the City is going to go anywhere soon as there is plenty of creativity there which will come to the fore.
Notwithstanding saffa covid, one imagines the UK will generally be a less conducive place for a sars-cov2 virus to go forth and prosper this summer than last, no matter how far the government loosens things.
So one would hope we could quite easily have some semblance of normality this summer, followed by a lightning programme of mRNA boosters in time for Back To School. Shapps’ comments today about domestic hospitality / tourism puts him in the same “unfit for public office” box as so many of the rest of them.
If you are really concerned about their well being then stop making cheap points about holidays and start making serious points about their access to parks and the countryside without being hassled by the authorities.