You can normally tell pretty quickly if a protest is going to turn into a riot by looking at the cause. Both pro EU and anti EU protests/marches, antifracking, countryside alliance, anti Iraq war were/are far more march/protest than riot. Reclaim the streets would probably have been in this category in normal times and was fucked up by the MET. Then there's the borderline ones both BLM and anti-lockdown probably in this category. Finally there's the anti capitalist/anti Tory hard left nonsense that always ends up in riots. The Bristol stuff was only ever going to end up in the riot category. It's mostly about the types of people protesting and what portion of the crowd are there to make a point (Anti iraq war, Brexit (Both sides)) - most of the crowd are there for that specific cause. But the sort of protest in Bristol will always have a massively disproportionate number of hard left/anarchist agitators so any real message is lost. And when you're setting police vans on fire, boy is that message lost.
You miss out the EDL type protest that very often result in trouble. It is not just the radical left.
EDL protests are tiny and rare, tho
I may be wrong, but i wouldn't say a characteristic of the EDL is one of "hijacking" protests the way the far left do. EDL protests, i would suggest, generally arise from one of two types - some sort of protest where they are the major organiser/instigator (so that there will be trouble is known from the start), or a presence/counterprotest to those organised by the far left.
Far left protests are far more likely to start mainstream and peaceful, and descend into trouble late in the day when most of the genuine protestors have left. In a way that what a bit of what happened at the Clapham common protests (from the limited pictures that i saw).
Why are they delivering letters?! Eveyone being invited now has a phone and an internet connection. Send them a text with their NHS number and booking link. Letters are unnecessary and cumbersome.
They want to put them in blue envelopes.
You can't put a text in a blue envelope......
Fake news - the 60,000 appointment letters weren't delayed, just heavily redacted...
All these "never happened", "rarely happened" or "not since 1970" remarks ... xkcd applies: https://xkcd.com/1122/
There simply aren't enough elections often enough to form hard and fast rules. What's happened in the past is history, but no rule for the future.
Obviously we can't form hard and fast rules, but we can and should form forecasts of how likely different outcomes are - and precedents can help. Clearly a government with a majority of 100 is more likely to hold it than one with a majority of 10, all else being equal. Likewise with mid-term polling. Obviously being ahead a couple of years before an election doesn't mean you'll win it - but you are more likely to than if you are 10 points behind.
Being the incumbent, ahead in the polls, and with a PM vastly more charismatic than the LotO is almost as strong a position as you could hope for
I hadn’t even thought about it, but 7/4 seems humongous, good spot Quincel
I think Cons largest party is better value. I'm on that at 1.8 for a decent amount.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Of course the argument is ludicrous. But you can bet that won't stop the Tories from claiming that opposition to the bill equates to going soft on the rioters. And they will be successful. Maybe if they go for any subtlety/nuance they will try to argue that the changes were requested by the police and that opposition is undermining the police (who were the targets in Bristol).
I for one would like to thank the comrades in Bristol for doing the kind of sterling, unpaid PR work for Priti Patel and her Bill that Ursula von der Leyen is doing for the Government as a whole...
You trying to start a riot?
Little known titbit of information. The M32 is known as tittysex - because it’s the quickest way to come into Bristol.
In their desperation to avoid this outcome, Sturgeon and the taxpayer-funded hatchet men who run her spin operation have tried to portray this as a matter of being either on her side or Salmond’s.
I, like many others, am on neither side. I regard both of them as indolent narcissists whose relentless egotism and naked power-hunger have set this country back decades. If you are poor, if you are a child struggling at school, if you are on a waiting list, if you suffer mental ill-health — if you need a government more committed to changing your material conditions than changing the colour of cloth up a flagpole — almost any government would have been an improvement on this one. You are not their priority and you’re never going to be.
Salmond and Sturgeon may be at odds these days — after years of being inseparable, years we are now expected to flush down the memory hole — but the reason they worked together so well for so long is that they are strikingly similar politicians. Dreams above circumstances. Party above country. Self above everything. Rotten peas in the same rotten pod.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Of course the argument is ludicrous. But you can bet that won't stop the Tories from claiming that opposition to the bill equates to going soft on the rioters. And they will be successful. Maybe if they go for any subtlety/nuance they will try to argue that the changes were requested by the police and that opposition is undermining the police (who were the targets in Bristol).
I for one would like to thank the comrades in Bristol for doing the kind of sterling, unpaid PR work for Priti Patel and her Bill that Ursula von der Leyen is doing for the Government as a whole...
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Haven't we been here before? What does the typical contract have to say about countries getting too far ahead with the programme so that it isn't fair shares?
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
I’m not sure people in Myanmar are that keen on the new name. Same way a lot of people in Mumbai still emphatically call it Bombay, and almost everyone in ‘Ho Chi Minh City’ calls it Saigon, with a slight hint of contempt and defiance
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Indeed, my Burmese friends prefer Burma to Myanmar. The latter is more accurate, but the association with the military regime taints it too much.
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Are swimming pools safe?
Zoos outdoors is one thing, but indoor pools with everyone else's sweaty aerosols inside, the same communal shower areas etc - they seem instinctively to be the sort of soup where transmission would be more likely not less.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
Except when we tried the low-regulation approach last year it led to R above 1 and exponential growth.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Indeed, my Burmese friends prefer Burma to Myanmar. The latter is more accurate, but the association with the military regime taints it too much.
Do try that memoir. It’s a work of art. One of the greatest memoirs I’ve ever read.
The Land Of Green Ghosts
I picked it up casually, in a posh hotel in chiang Mai in the winter of 2006, I ended it 3 days later. Completely spellbound
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
How many regimes toppled by the Arab Spring were replaced by democracies or at the very least non brutal dictatorships?
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
Lol. Which one was successful??? They were nearly all failures, some were utter catastrophes. Only Tunisia, maybe, escaped the nightmare. Libya. Egypt. Syria. SYRIA
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Indeed, my Burmese friends prefer Burma to Myanmar. The latter is more accurate, but the association with the military regime taints it too much.
Do try that memoir. It’s a work of art. One of the greatest memoirs I’ve ever read.
The Land Of Green Ghosts
I picked it up casually, in a posh hotel in chiang Mai in the winter of 2006, I ended it 3 days later. Completely spellbound
If you don't know it, I'd highly recommend A Cure for Serpents: A Doctor in Africa from 1955 by Alberto Denti di Pirajno. It tells of his time in Libya, Italian Somalia and Ethiopia between the wars
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
One of the greatest geopolitical disasters of recent times. Nice example.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
How many regimes toppled by the Arab Spring were replaced by democracies or at the very least non brutal dictatorships?
You place a rather Western pair of specs on. Was democracy what the revolutionaries wanted? Or was it Islamism?
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
What is the significance of so many buildings no longer having fresh air and instead relying on air conditioning?
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
Except when we tried the low-regulation approach last year it led to R above 1 and exponential growth.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
My focus is on social distancing. I’ve been jumping aside to let people pass 6 feet away, or nervously edging down walls to avoid others, FOR A FUCKING YEAR. It’s inhuman and depressing. Our streets have been made ugly with those stupid wider pavements and those ugly blocks
if it turns out that advice was scientific nonsense, fuck
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
Lol. Which one was successful??? They were nearly all failures, some were utter catastrophes. Only Tunisia, maybe, escaped the nightmare. Libya. Egypt. Syria. SYRIA
Egypt was successful. After thirty years the regime of Hosni Mubarak was overthrown.
That Egypt when from one form of shit to another to another afterwards doesn't make the revolution any less successful. Most revolutions do that.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
How many regimes toppled by the Arab Spring were replaced by democracies or at the very least non brutal dictatorships?
You place a rather Western pair of specs on. Was democracy what the revolutionaries wanted? Or was it Islamism?
Well no, apparently people wanted the end of the old dictatorial regimes, and what did they end up with? Dictatorial regimes. Some Spring that was.
This idea that they were social media fuelled revolutions is a typical westerns specs wearing point of view.
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Indeed, my Burmese friends prefer Burma to Myanmar. The latter is more accurate, but the association with the military regime taints it too much.
Do try that memoir. It’s a work of art. One of the greatest memoirs I’ve ever read.
The Land Of Green Ghosts
I picked it up casually, in a posh hotel in chiang Mai in the winter of 2006, I ended it 3 days later. Completely spellbound
If you don't know it, I'd highly recommend A Cure for Serpents: A Doctor in Africa from 1955 by Alberto Denti di Pirajno. It tells of his time in Libya, Italian Somalia and Ethiopia between the wars
Ooh, I shall have a look
A great contemporary memoir I just read is
SOME KIDS I TAUGHT AND WHAT THEY TAUGHT ME
by a teacher/poet called Kate Clanchy. Superb. A touching sad clever wise bleak yet hopeful portrait of modern British kids. Also full of great poetry written by them - poor, working class, black, white, Muslim, all sorts. Uplifting
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
Except when we tried the low-regulation approach last year it led to R above 1 and exponential growth.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
I'm not sure we ever serious opted for "sensible" measures did we? The various measures imposed have always been relatively arbitrary and not particularly science based - and, specifically, never focussed on the obvious and known sources of major transmission as opposed to the theoretical, but minor sources. And hugely inconsistent with massive loopholes for "essential" activities.
The result being that hugely dangerous activity continued if considered "essential" (rather loosely defined at all times) whilst largely harmless activity was prevented. And it probably wasn't zero sum - often the outlawing of relatively harmless (but highly visible) activity inevitably led to more harmful but invisible activity as a result. Because the outlawing of the former was enforceable. The outlawing of the latter (unless exceedingly blatant) was not. But let's not go over all the old arguments again...
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
How many regimes toppled by the Arab Spring were replaced by democracies or at the very least non brutal dictatorships?
You place a rather Western pair of specs on. Was democracy what the revolutionaries wanted? Or was it Islamism?
Well they didn’t get Islamism either. It was crushed in Libya and Egypt. And eventually crushed at horrific cost in Syria
Tbh my original remark was throwaway. But it is noticeable how many recent revolutions have FAILED
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The issue being that the LibDems once were strongly opposed to tuition fees. My £50,000+ student debt that ticks up every month is a very real reminder of the folly of expecting the LDs to stick to their principles.
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Indeed, my Burmese friends prefer Burma to Myanmar. The latter is more accurate, but the association with the military regime taints it too much.
Do try that memoir. It’s a work of art. One of the greatest memoirs I’ve ever read.
The Land Of Green Ghosts
I picked it up casually, in a posh hotel in chiang Mai in the winter of 2006, I ended it 3 days later. Completely spellbound
If you don't know it, I'd highly recommend A Cure for Serpents: A Doctor in Africa from 1955 by Alberto Denti di Pirajno. It tells of his time in Libya, Italian Somalia and Ethiopia between the wars
Ooh, I shall have a look
A great contemporary memoir I just read is
SOME KIDS I TAUGHT AND WHAT THEY TAUGHT ME
by a teacher/poet called Kate Clanchy. Superb. A touching sad clever wise bleak yet hopeful portrait of modern British kids. Also full of great poetry written by them - poor, working class, black, white, Muslim, all sorts. Uplifting
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Indeed, my Burmese friends prefer Burma to Myanmar. The latter is more accurate, but the association with the military regime taints it too much.
Do try that memoir. It’s a work of art. One of the greatest memoirs I’ve ever read.
The Land Of Green Ghosts
I picked it up casually, in a posh hotel in chiang Mai in the winter of 2006, I ended it 3 days later. Completely spellbound
If you don't know it, I'd highly recommend A Cure for Serpents: A Doctor in Africa from 1955 by Alberto Denti di Pirajno. It tells of his time in Libya, Italian Somalia and Ethiopia between the wars
Ooh, I shall have a look
A great contemporary memoir I just read is
SOME KIDS I TAUGHT AND WHAT THEY TAUGHT ME
by a teacher/poet called Kate Clanchy. Superb. A touching sad clever wise bleak yet hopeful portrait of modern British kids. Also full of great poetry written by them - poor, working class, black, white, Muslim, all sorts. Uplifting
Thanks, I'll look at both your recommendations
I just bought your recommendation. One of the few upsides of lockdown is the opportunity to read a LOT of books
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
Lol. Which one was successful??? They were nearly all failures, some were utter catastrophes. Only Tunisia, maybe, escaped the nightmare. Libya. Egypt. Syria. SYRIA
Egypt was successful. After thirty years the regime of Hosni Mubarak was overthrown.
That Egypt when from one form of shit to another to another afterwards doesn't make the revolution any less successful. Most revolutions do that.
Hmm, I think it depends a bit. If counter-revolutions undo what the revolution achieved, was the latter really successful? For a time, maybe, but that's not how people would casually think of it I would say. I think it is hard to judge as the success, brief or otherwise, of a revolutionary event might well be initially reversed, but that it did succeed for a time can play into things later, like 1688's context being after a far more radical event years before probably being influenced by that event.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Indeed, my Burmese friends prefer Burma to Myanmar. The latter is more accurate, but the association with the military regime taints it too much.
Do try that memoir. It’s a work of art. One of the greatest memoirs I’ve ever read.
The Land Of Green Ghosts
I picked it up casually, in a posh hotel in chiang Mai in the winter of 2006, I ended it 3 days later. Completely spellbound
If you don't know it, I'd highly recommend A Cure for Serpents: A Doctor in Africa from 1955 by Alberto Denti di Pirajno. It tells of his time in Libya, Italian Somalia and Ethiopia between the wars
Ooh, I shall have a look
A great contemporary memoir I just read is
SOME KIDS I TAUGHT AND WHAT THEY TAUGHT ME
by a teacher/poet called Kate Clanchy. Superb. A touching sad clever wise bleak yet hopeful portrait of modern British kids. Also full of great poetry written by them - poor, working class, black, white, Muslim, all sorts. Uplifting
Thanks, I'll look at both your recommendations
I just bought your recommendation. One of the few upsides of lockdown is the opportunity to read a LOT of books
Bugger of it is you also buy a lot more. I literally read a book a day last year (there were many which were pretty short, so I could cheat by getting several done on weekend days) and somehow still have like 100 unread books on the shelves.
And now I've read less than 7 this year to date, so that's going to be a struggle to clear.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
How many regimes toppled by the Arab Spring were replaced by democracies or at the very least non brutal dictatorships?
You place a rather Western pair of specs on. Was democracy what the revolutionaries wanted? Or was it Islamism?
Well they didn’t get Islamism either. It was crushed in Libya and Egypt. And eventually crushed at horrific cost in Syria
Tbh my original remark was throwaway. But it is noticeable how many recent revolutions have FAILED
Is a revolution only a success if it ends in a Utopia?
If so almost every revolution in recorded history has failed.
Or is a revolution a success if it brings down the ancien regime? Even if what comes after is unpleasant? In which case it succeeded in the same way as the French Revolution did.
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
I’m not sure people in Myanmar are that keen on the new name. Same way a lot of people in Mumbai still emphatically call it Bombay, and almost everyone in ‘Ho Chi Minh City’ calls it Saigon, with a slight hint of contempt and defiance
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
Except when we tried the low-regulation approach last year it led to R above 1 and exponential growth.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
My focus is on social distancing. I’ve been jumping aside to let people pass 6 feet away, or nervously edging down walls to avoid others, FOR A FUCKING YEAR. It’s inhuman and depressing. Our streets have been made ugly with those stupid wider pavements and those ugly blocks
if it turns out that advice was scientific nonsense, fuck
It wasn't scientific nonsense - in the sense of being arbitrary. As suggested in the video it came from a belief that we were dealing with something similar to flu. But what seems weird is that there was never much attempt to tweak the strategy and guidance to the growing evidence on actual risks.
In fact, many have argued that the entire failure of the early UK strategy was not unrelated to the fact that (contrary to popular belief) we had well refined plans and strategies for dealing with a global pandemic (US also). Indeed there were news articles at how surprising the failure of US/UK was, given we were considered among the globally best prepared for a pandemic.
But we were prepared for the flu. And when it wasn't the flu, we clung on to our "well pre-planned strategies" for far too long. Arguably we still are even now, with continued references to washing hands and huge ongoing expense of cleaning offices etc. And yes, the 2m rule. When everyone else was watching what they were doing in the Far East.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Of course the argument is ludicrous. But you can bet that won't stop the Tories from claiming that opposition to the bill equates to going soft on the rioters. And they will be successful. Maybe if they go for any subtlety/nuance they will try to argue that the changes were requested by the police and that opposition is undermining the police (who were the targets in Bristol).
I for one would like to thank the comrades in Bristol for doing the kind of sterling, unpaid PR work for Priti Patel and her Bill that Ursula von der Leyen is doing for the Government as a whole...
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
Lol. Which one was successful??? They were nearly all failures, some were utter catastrophes. Only Tunisia, maybe, escaped the nightmare. Libya. Egypt. Syria. SYRIA
Egypt was successful. After thirty years the regime of Hosni Mubarak was overthrown.
That Egypt when from one form of shit to another to another afterwards doesn't make the revolution any less successful. Most revolutions do that.
People tend to forget the considerable role of the military in finishing off Mubarak's regime. At the time on this forum I described it as part popular rising part military coup.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
And how’s that going?
I always thought it was a bit stupid calling it the Arab Spring - it's a type of somersault, an arab spring. I remember my sister trying to do them.
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
I’m not sure people in Myanmar are that keen on the new name. Same way a lot of people in Mumbai still emphatically call it Bombay, and almost everyone in ‘Ho Chi Minh City’ calls it Saigon, with a slight hint of contempt and defiance
It's not just cities and countries. Some people struggle to adjust when people adopt a new name, and refer back to their previous one.
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Indeed, my Burmese friends prefer Burma to Myanmar. The latter is more accurate, but the association with the military regime taints it too much.
Do try that memoir. It’s a work of art. One of the greatest memoirs I’ve ever read.
The Land Of Green Ghosts
I picked it up casually, in a posh hotel in chiang Mai in the winter of 2006, I ended it 3 days later. Completely spellbound
If you don't know it, I'd highly recommend A Cure for Serpents: A Doctor in Africa from 1955 by Alberto Denti di Pirajno. It tells of his time in Libya, Italian Somalia and Ethiopia between the wars
Ooh, I shall have a look
A great contemporary memoir I just read is
SOME KIDS I TAUGHT AND WHAT THEY TAUGHT ME
by a teacher/poet called Kate Clanchy. Superb. A touching sad clever wise bleak yet hopeful portrait of modern British kids. Also full of great poetry written by them - poor, working class, black, white, Muslim, all sorts. Uplifting
Thanks, I'll look at both your recommendations
I just bought your recommendation. One of the few upsides of lockdown is the opportunity to read a LOT of books
Let me know what you think. I read it about 50 years ago as a teen, but it left a strong impression on me.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
And they will still be successfully accused on going soft on violent protestors.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
How many regimes toppled by the Arab Spring were replaced by democracies or at the very least non brutal dictatorships?
You place a rather Western pair of specs on. Was democracy what the revolutionaries wanted? Or was it Islamism?
Well they didn’t get Islamism either. It was crushed in Libya and Egypt. And eventually crushed at horrific cost in Syria
Tbh my original remark was throwaway. But it is noticeable how many recent revolutions have FAILED
Is a revolution only a success if it ends in a Utopia?
If so almost every revolution in recorded history has failed.
Or is a revolution a success if it brings down the ancien regime? Even if what comes after is unpleasant? In which case it succeeded in the same way as the French Revolution did.
They have to further their aims in some way, and hopefully achieve them outright to be a success. This is easier if they are revolutions of independence. The goal is obvious.
So the American and Irish revolutions were totally successful.
So was the russian, in a different way. So was China in 1949. So was 1688 and so was Brexit (both bloodless). The uprisings against communism in 1989 yep. Turkey under ataturk. Castro
I’d say the French was a partial success. Ancien regime gone. Likewise the English civil war. But both were partly overturned.
Failed: tiananmen, Hong Kong 2020, all of the Arab spring. Many many others
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
Lol. Which one was successful??? They were nearly all failures, some were utter catastrophes. Only Tunisia, maybe, escaped the nightmare. Libya. Egypt. Syria. SYRIA
Egypt was successful. After thirty years the regime of Hosni Mubarak was overthrown.
That Egypt when from one form of shit to another to another afterwards doesn't make the revolution any less successful. Most revolutions do that.
People tend to forget the considerable role of the military in finishing off Mubarak's regime. At the time on this forum I described it as part popular rising part military coup.
I'd have thought the fundamental problem you have with revolts against military dictatorships is that unless it itself fractures they either have to actively back the revolt or let it happen - either way, it only succeeded by their whim, they know that, and may well change their minds.
Not that it is impossible to claw back control from a military regime, but they can be canny these juntas.
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
Except when we tried the low-regulation approach last year it led to R above 1 and exponential growth.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
My focus is on social distancing. I’ve been jumping aside to let people pass 6 feet away, or nervously edging down walls to avoid others, FOR A FUCKING YEAR. It’s inhuman and depressing. Our streets have been made ugly with those stupid wider pavements and those ugly blocks
if it turns out that advice was scientific nonsense, fuck
It wasn't scientific nonsense - in the sense of being arbitrary. As suggested in the video it came from a belief that we were dealing with something similar to flu. But what seems weird is that there was never much attempt to tweak the strategy and guidance to the growing evidence on actual risks.
In fact, many have argued that the entire failure of the early UK strategy was not unrelated to the fact that (contrary to popular belief) we had well refined plans and strategies for dealing with a global pandemic (US also). Indeed there were news articles at how surprising the failure of US/UK was, given we were considered among the globally best prepared for a pandemic.
But we were prepared for the flu. And when it wasn't the flu, we clung on to our "well pre-planned strategies" for far too long. Arguably we still are even now, with continued references to washing hands and huge ongoing expense of cleaning offices etc. And yes, the 2m rule. When everyone else was watching what they were doing in the Far East.
Yes, totally. Our obsession with flu probably cost us £150bn and 50,000 lives. A scientific and public health catastrophe
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
I wonder why you left her out.
One copper has a punctured lung because protestors “stomped on him”
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
Lol. Which one was successful??? They were nearly all failures, some were utter catastrophes. Only Tunisia, maybe, escaped the nightmare. Libya. Egypt. Syria. SYRIA
Egypt was successful. After thirty years the regime of Hosni Mubarak was overthrown.
That Egypt when from one form of shit to another to another afterwards doesn't make the revolution any less successful. Most revolutions do that.
People tend to forget the considerable role of the military in finishing off Mubarak's regime. At the time on this forum I described it as part popular rising part military coup.
I'd have thought the fundamental problem you have with revolts against military dictatorships is that unless it itself fractures they either have to actively back the revolt or let it happen - either way, it only succeeded by their whim, they know that, and may well change their minds.
Not that it is impossible to claw back control from a military regime, but they can be canny these juntas.
The military proved themselves rather adept in Egypt but they did have an advantage in that the personnel in the institution didn't really break away from the institution itself to any significant degree.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
I wonder why you left her out.
Well, because she's a Nottingham MP, a bit daft, and very irrelevant. I guess you'd wisely ignore Mark Francois, Desmond Swayne and several others when they blurt out nonsense on issue x.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
Did you just call the LibDrms principled?!
Be fair
They gave that donation back they got from the fraudster right? ...............
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
I wonder why you left her out.
Well, because she's a Nottingham MP, a bit daft, and very irrelevant. I guess you'd wisely ignore Mark Francois, Desmond Swayne and several others when they blurt out nonsense on issue x.
People like her do more damage to your cause, however, than a dick like Francois (an idiot, I entirely agree) does to the right. He’s just spouting imbecile nonsense with a red face. It’s not terribly offensive and it doesn’t undermine conservatism - tho it may reinforce some lefty hatred of Tories.
The rad left MPs refusing to condemn rioters burning down police vans and injuring coppers taint the whole leftwing. Especially after Corbyn, who is their apparent patron saint.. and became Leader
This is possibly unfair. But I think it is the case.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
I wonder why you left her out.
Well, because she's a Nottingham MP, a bit daft, and very irrelevant. I guess you'd wisely ignore Mark Francois, Desmond Swayne and several others when they blurt out nonsense on issue x.
Once someone picks up a stone and throws it the normal rules of whataboutery about politicians you don't like doesn't cut it. Violence is violence and is rarely called upon as necessary. The situation in Bristol was not of those few exceptions .
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The Arab Spring says hello.
And how’s that going?
I always thought it was a bit stupid calling it the Arab Spring - it's a type of somersault, an arab spring. I remember my sister trying to do them.
In fairness it's probably only afterwards that people get the time to focus test the branding of their revolution. Glorious. Rose. Singing.
I wonder if the junta style names post coup have a specific brand to them, with all the 'Committee for the preservation of the state and restoration of democracy' style regime names that have been used.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
I wonder why you left her out.
Well, because she's a Nottingham MP, a bit daft, and very irrelevant. I guess you'd wisely ignore Mark Francois, Desmond Swayne and several others when they blurt out nonsense on issue x.
It's 'very irrelevant' that she and the Labour far left are egging on the 'Kill The Bill' protesters, who have now started taking their stupid slogan literally? No, she seems all too relevant indeed.
Myanmar looks like a word that you'd accidentally type on screen after faceplanting into your keyboard. It also looks, sounds and feels all a bit Junta-ish. Maybe even a bit Khmer Rougey. Don't like it.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
"In the Burmese language Burmar is known as Bama (ဗမာ [bəmà] MLCTS: ba.ma). Burmar is the written, literary name of the country, while Bama is the spoken name of the country.[1] Burmese, like Javanese and other languages of Southeast Asia, has different levels of register, with sharp differences between literary and spoken language.[2]
"Both names derive ultimately from the endonym of the largest ethnic group in Burma, the Bamar people, also known as Bama or Burmans in the spoken register and in the literary register."
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further.
I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
Sure, they are idiots but their violent actions are already illegal under existing law. The police Bill outlaws peaceful protest, not violent one's.
Worth remembering that we are at the 30th anniversary of the end of the Poll Tax. Sometimes protest and civil disobedience is necessary to make government's to listen.
I’m all for the right to protest and I am dismayed by a the glibness with which we throw away our liberties, however, last night revealed a big problem with most protest movements in the UK. They get hijacked by a ghastly combination of middle class hipsters, bored students, militant Marxists, sinister Antifa, ridiculous wankers, actual anarchists, and ladies who like to poo in public. Then they all take selfies and go on Instagram.
As a result they all run out of steam and end up absurd or reviled.
I had several friends who are - or were - passionately XR but left it in despair at the invasion of Marxism, identity politics and idiot rich girls from Kew who wanted to do special dances down Regent Street
I imagine protest movements in history have often been quite like this. Protest attracts eccentrics, students, rich people who have the time, BUT social media amplifies and broadcasts their wankiness, deleteriously
Yep. Protest movements tend to be driven by individuals who are a turn off to the silent majority. One rarely sees an Ed Davey or a Philip Hammond at the forefront. Not sure what the answer is to this.
Yes, but all change is brought about by unreasonable people. Reasonable people bend to the world, unreasonable people bend thr world to fit them, thereby changing it. The role of reasonable people is to form a new consensus, not to change it.
Yeah, but social media is their downfall, because these unreasonable people are therefore dickheads, and everyone sees that dickness first, and then tunes out from the message
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
I wonder why you left her out.
Well, because she's a Nottingham MP, a bit daft, and very irrelevant. I guess you'd wisely ignore Mark Francois, Desmond Swayne and several others when they blurt out nonsense on issue x.
It's 'very irrelevant' that she and the Labour far left are egging on the 'Kill The Bill' protesters, who have now started taking their stupid slogan literally? No, she seems all too relevant indeed.
Labour supporters would love us to ignore their hard left contingent.
All these "never happened", "rarely happened" or "not since 1970" remarks ... xkcd applies: https://xkcd.com/1122/
There simply aren't enough elections often enough to form hard and fast rules. What's happened in the past is history, but no rule for the future.
Obviously we can't form hard and fast rules, but we can and should form forecasts of how likely different outcomes are - and precedents can help. Clearly a government with a majority of 100 is more likely to hold it than one with a majority of 10, all else being equal. Likewise with mid-term polling. Obviously being ahead a couple of years before an election doesn't mean you'll win it - but you are more likely to than if you are 10 points behind.
Being the incumbent, ahead in the polls, and with a PM vastly more charismatic than the LotO is almost as strong a position as you could hope for
I hadn’t even thought about it, but 7/4 seems humongous, good spot Quincel
I think Cons largest party is better value. I'm on that at 1.8 for a decent amount.
I guess the way I could see Con maj being better value is that if the Cons are going to lose an 80 seat majority, it could be down to something so bad that they aren’t the largest party either?
8th May 2020 I put £25 on Con most seats at 1.79 - 100k deaths later and Brexit apparently going terribly and they’re 1.67. What would have to happen for Labour to win?!
All these "never happened", "rarely happened" or "not since 1970" remarks ... xkcd applies: https://xkcd.com/1122/
There simply aren't enough elections often enough to form hard and fast rules. What's happened in the past is history, but no rule for the future.
Obviously we can't form hard and fast rules, but we can and should form forecasts of how likely different outcomes are - and precedents can help. Clearly a government with a majority of 100 is more likely to hold it than one with a majority of 10, all else being equal. Likewise with mid-term polling. Obviously being ahead a couple of years before an election doesn't mean you'll win it - but you are more likely to than if you are 10 points behind.
Being the incumbent, ahead in the polls, and with a PM vastly more charismatic than the LotO is almost as strong a position as you could hope for
I hadn’t even thought about it, but 7/4 seems humongous, good spot Quincel
I think Cons largest party is better value. I'm on that at 1.8 for a decent amount.
I guess the way I could see Con maj being better value is that if the Cons are going to lose an 80 seat majority, it could be down to something so bad that they aren’t the largest party either?
8th May 2020 I put £25 on Con most seats at 1.79 - 100k deaths later and Brexit apparently going terribly and they’re 1.67. What would have to happen for Labour to win?!
The economy. If Covid becomes a seasonally managed disease other issues will take over
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
Except when we tried the low-regulation approach last year it led to R above 1 and exponential growth.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
My focus is on social distancing. I’ve been jumping aside to let people pass 6 feet away, or nervously edging down walls to avoid others, FOR A FUCKING YEAR. It’s inhuman and depressing. Our streets have been made ugly with those stupid wider pavements and those ugly blocks
if it turns out that advice was scientific nonsense, fuck
Aren't you putting too much weight on one retrospective report? There were a range of measures to minimise transmission, and nobody really knew which would be most effective. I'd submit that we still don't know for sure, and I'm glad we've been, and still are, careful. Nlot sure what the problem is - when I go for a walk in my small town, either I or the pedestrian approaching step sideways to avoid close contact, and we usually smile and nod in appreciation - it's a sort of courtly dance with two total strangers cooperating to keep them both well. Previously we'd just march past each other, avoiding eye contact - this is much friendlier.
I concede, though, that in your city environment it may be a little different.
Why are they delivering letters?! Eveyone being invited now has a phone and an internet connection. Send them a text with their NHS number and booking link. Letters are unnecessary and cumbersome.
What makes you think because I have a phone the nhs has the number or my email....clue they dont
They got 21% and 19% in 2016 I see, albeit during a high water mark for UKIP. But it feels like they often get close in polls then cannot quite make it stick.
Interesting that the Greens are below the LDs, despite the LDs doing even more poorly in Wales than the rest of Britain.
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
Except when we tried the low-regulation approach last year it led to R above 1 and exponential growth.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
My focus is on social distancing. I’ve been jumping aside to let people pass 6 feet away, or nervously edging down walls to avoid others, FOR A FUCKING YEAR. It’s inhuman and depressing. Our streets have been made ugly with those stupid wider pavements and those ugly blocks
if it turns out that advice was scientific nonsense, fuck
Aren't you putting too much weight on one retrospective report? There were a range of measures to minimise transmission, and nobody really knew which would be most effective. I'd submit that we still don't know for sure, and I'm glad we've been, and still are, careful. Nlot sure what the problem is - when I go for a walk in my small town, either I or the pedestrian approaching step sideways to avoid close contact, and we usually smile and nod in appreciation - it's a sort of courtly dance with two total strangers cooperating to keep them both well. Previously we'd just march past each other, avoiding eye contact - this is much friendlier.
I concede, though, that in your city environment it may be a little different.
It’s a huge expensive pain in big cities. And any crowded outdoor environment
That poll is not great for Labour. If Wales votes Conservative then thats Labour's three traditional heartlands (Scotland, Wales, 'the red wall') ripped away from them within 6 years. London, Bristol, and Liverpool can't deliver a majority by themselves.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
I wonder why you left her out.
One copper has a punctured lung because protestors “stomped on him”
Nice
Intellectually, I am thoroughly opposed to the bill. However, emotionally, seeing reports from Bristol makes me want to join the police and go and give some crusties a kicking. The protestors have managed to alienate me, and probably thousands of others, from a cause we initially supported. I don't want the state to wield arbitrary power. But nor do I want the mob to wield arbitrary power.
It is disturbing that Keir has not led in his honeymoon year.
Lawyers, intellectuals, academics, journos all love Keir. But, he does not seem to have the folksy charm to connect with the voters --- as Bill Clinton or Tony Blair did.
He comes across as cold, stilted, wooden. He is a male Theresa.
So, the header is right. Keir is a loser. He is probably a great guy, certainly compared to Boris. But, he is a loser and he is heading for defeat against Boris. Get rid.
Labour have plenty better options.
Really? Name three.
Better options .... Rayner or Nandy would be much trickier for Boris, I suspect.
Rayner, especially. would surely bring out the worst in the bumbling Old Etonian.
Any attractive woman would be a problem for him. I doubt he’d be able to focus on the job.
I suspect his charm would be lost on Ms Rayner.
I would love to see her in a top 4 job, like Shadow Home Sec. She would give Priti a very hard time, standing up for freedom.
She'd have to deal with idiots like Nadia Whittome first.
The morons rioting in Bristol last night have completely undermined any principled opposition to the Police Bill. Labour will be painted as weak on violence. The Tories will claim - wrongly - that this proves why such laws are needed (they're not as there are sufficient laws in place to deal with what happened last night). Meanwhile our freedoms are eroded further. I have nothing but contempt for those Bristol fuckwits.
You are very lucky then, Ms Cyclefree, that the Lib Dems are strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill - and in fact passed a resolution against it at this weekend's party conference - and yet are not involved with violent demonstrations. If you want principled opposition, you know where to come.
The Labour Party is also strongly opposed to Ms Patel's bill, and is also not involved with violent demonstrations (the violence has been roundly condemned by Starmer, Thomas-Symonds, all Bristol Labour MPs, and the Labour Mayor of Bristol).
But not by the Labour MP Nadia Whittome, who repeatedly refused to condemn the violence committed by her ideological comrades - that's 21 injured police officers, including ones with broken arms and ribs.
I wonder why you left her out.
One copper has a punctured lung because protestors “stomped on him”
Nice
Intellectually, I am thoroughly opposed to the bill. However, emotionally, seeing reports from Bristol makes me want to join the police and go and give some crusties a kicking. The protestors have managed to alienate me, and probably thousands of others, from a cause we initially supported. I don't want the state to wield arbitrary power. But nor do I want the mob to wield arbitrary power.
Clearly some misread kill the bill, for kill the old bill....
Another couple of plod had a lucky escape when one of the rioters set light to the fuel tank of the van they were in.
Yes, pretty shocked by these figures. It's not that Labour have lost a lot of support, it's more the Tories have gained support. I assume it's from former UKIP/Brexit party supporters. Added to that we have the vaccine bounce that the Tories have had in England has fed over the border. From a Labour supporter it is disappointing that on the whole the Labour government here has had a decent pandemic, but the extra coverage it has had to normal hasn't done it any good.
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
And fresh air. Which shut down some major businesses at vast cost for no obvious benefit. Whilst people were allowed in parks. It's as is if some places were only allowed to open if they weren't coincidentally charging businesses.
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers) National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers) Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
Swimming pools should not have been closed.
Masks and restriction of indoor activity to extremely well ventilated areas are and always have been the key to a sensible anti coronavirus strategy as far as i can tell (usual disclaimers)
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
Except when we tried the low-regulation approach last year it led to R above 1 and exponential growth.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
My focus is on social distancing. I’ve been jumping aside to let people pass 6 feet away, or nervously edging down walls to avoid others, FOR A FUCKING YEAR. It’s inhuman and depressing. Our streets have been made ugly with those stupid wider pavements and those ugly blocks
if it turns out that advice was scientific nonsense, fuck
Aren't you putting too much weight on one retrospective report? There were a range of measures to minimise transmission, and nobody really knew which would be most effective. I'd submit that we still don't know for sure, and I'm glad we've been, and still are, careful. Nlot sure what the problem is - when I go for a walk in my small town, either I or the pedestrian approaching step sideways to avoid close contact, and we usually smile and nod in appreciation - it's a sort of courtly dance with two total strangers cooperating to keep them both well. Previously we'd just march past each other, avoiding eye contact - this is much friendlier.
I concede, though, that in your city environment it may be a little different.
It’s a huge expensive pain in big cities. And any crowded outdoor environment
I agree we need to see more proof
There is also a difficulty in getting across the idea that infection prevention and control is a layered set of measures that work together, and that we cannot and should not rely on just one of the measures.
Rather than slavishly cleaving to each and every rule, we should instead recognize reality. So, as I have advised medical professionals in refugee camps, when you know you will not be able to enforce social distancing - for example at water distribution points in the camp, of which there are but few for many people and crowding necessarily prevails - think of which of the other elements of infection control you might boost or add in that setting to make up for the diminution of social distancing's contribution to infection control.
Comments
Far left protests are far more likely to start mainstream and peaceful, and descend into trouble late in the day when most of the genuine protestors have left. In a way that what a bit of what happened at the Clapham common protests (from the limited pictures that i saw).
And... "agreed to ask Parliament to legislate for..." i would hope. Can imagine the courts might have something to say about this as well.
Little known titbit of information. The M32 is known as tittysex - because it’s the quickest way to come into Bristol.
I, like many others, am on neither side. I regard both of them as indolent narcissists whose relentless egotism and naked power-hunger have set this country back decades. If you are poor, if you are a child struggling at school, if you are on a waiting list, if you suffer mental ill-health — if you need a government more committed to changing your material conditions than changing the colour of cloth up a flagpole — almost any government would have been an improvement on this one. You are not their priority and you’re never going to be.
Salmond and Sturgeon may be at odds these days — after years of being inseparable, years we are now expected to flush down the memory hole — but the reason they worked together so well for so long is that they are strikingly similar politicians. Dreams above circumstances. Party above country. Self above everything. Rotten peas in the same rotten pod.
https://stephendaisley.com/2021/03/22/a-government-without-rules/
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1374120296182059009/photo/1
Surfaces were never an issue with Covid. We kinda know that. But equally the 2 metre rule is bollocks. Does nothing. A year of two metre distancing was pointless?!
Just aerosols. And masks. Jeez.
https://twitter.com/cnbcclosingbell/status/1373017828866068498?s=21
Parks - open (no restrictions on numbers)
National Trust gardens - open (no restrictions on numbers)
Zoos (with caps on numbers) - er, better not take the risk...
Japan worked this all out a year ago. Our friend in Tokyo told us all about it. The failure to narrow down the risks, and elevate all potential transmission vectors to have almost equal status was and still is a tragedy.
I much prefer Burma; it has a beautiful mystique to it's simplicity.
Burma.
Zoos outdoors is one thing, but indoor pools with everyone else's sweaty aerosols inside, the same communal shower areas etc - they seem instinctively to be the sort of soup where transmission would be more likely not less.
Theory: there will be no successful revolutions in the era of social media
The approach taken was applying zero-Covid measures (theoretically abolish all possible modes of transmission - lets ignore the thousands still going to work on crowded public transport etc) to a non zero-Covid strategy.
Such measures may have made sense in New Zealand, which has kittens if a cat tests positive. Not in most countries.
If "sensible measures" were enough this wouldn't have been so difficult, but they weren't.
So short of a vaccine the invidious choice was either letting it rip and living with it, or "unsensible" measures.
The Land Of Green Ghosts
I picked it up casually, in a posh hotel in chiang Mai in the winter of 2006, I ended it 3 days later. Completely spellbound
if it turns out that advice was scientific nonsense, fuck
That Egypt when from one form of shit to another to another afterwards doesn't make the revolution any less successful. Most revolutions do that.
This idea that they were social media fuelled revolutions is a typical westerns specs wearing point of view.
A great contemporary memoir I just read is
SOME KIDS I TAUGHT AND WHAT THEY TAUGHT ME
by a teacher/poet called Kate Clanchy. Superb. A touching sad clever wise bleak yet hopeful portrait of modern British kids. Also full of great poetry written by them - poor, working class, black, white, Muslim, all sorts. Uplifting
The result being that hugely dangerous activity continued if considered "essential" (rather loosely defined at all times) whilst largely harmless activity was prevented. And it probably wasn't zero sum - often the outlawing of relatively harmless (but highly visible) activity inevitably led to more harmful but invisible activity as a result. Because the outlawing of the former was enforceable. The outlawing of the latter (unless exceedingly blatant) was not. But let's not go over all the old arguments again...
Tbh my original remark was throwaway. But it is noticeable how many recent revolutions have FAILED
And now I've read less than 7 this year to date, so that's going to be a struggle to clear.
If so almost every revolution in recorded history has failed.
Or is a revolution a success if it brings down the ancien regime? Even if what comes after is unpleasant? In which case it succeeded in the same way as the French Revolution did.
The Chinese is mien ma incidentally.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/theculturetrip.com/asia/myanmar/articles/burma-v-myanmar-why-the-country-is-known-by-two-names/?amp=1
In fact, many have argued that the entire failure of the early UK strategy was not unrelated to the fact that (contrary to popular belief) we had well refined plans and strategies for dealing with a global pandemic (US also). Indeed there were news articles at how surprising the failure of US/UK was, given we were considered among the globally best prepared for a pandemic.
But we were prepared for the flu. And when it wasn't the flu, we clung on to our "well pre-planned strategies" for far too long. Arguably we still are even now, with continued references to washing hands and huge ongoing expense of cleaning offices etc. And yes, the 2m rule. When everyone else was watching what they were doing in the Far East.
So the American and Irish revolutions were totally successful.
So was the russian, in a different way. So was China in 1949. So was 1688 and so was Brexit (both bloodless). The uprisings against communism in 1989 yep. Turkey under ataturk. Castro
I’d say the French was a partial success. Ancien regime gone. Likewise the English civil war. But both were partly overturned.
Failed: tiananmen, Hong Kong 2020, all of the Arab spring. Many many others
Not that it is impossible to claw back control from a military regime, but they can be canny these juntas.
I wonder why you left her out.
Nice
They gave that donation back they got from the fraudster right? ...............
The rad left MPs refusing to condemn rioters burning down police vans and injuring coppers taint the whole leftwing. Especially after Corbyn, who is their apparent patron saint.. and became Leader
This is possibly unfair. But I think it is the case.
I can see Scottish Labour getting into second with this bloke
I wonder if the junta style names post coup have a specific brand to them, with all the 'Committee for the preservation of the state and restoration of democracy' style regime names that have been used.
Close THE DAMN BORDER
https://twitter.com/bnodesk/status/1374094211549646850?s=21
https://twitter.com/SpinningHugo/status/1374077531993870339
"In the Burmese language Burmar is known as Bama (ဗမာ [bəmà] MLCTS: ba.ma). Burmar is the written, literary name of the country, while Bama is the spoken name of the country.[1] Burmese, like Javanese and other languages of Southeast Asia, has different levels of register, with sharp differences between literary and spoken language.[2]
"Both names derive ultimately from the endonym of the largest ethnic group in Burma, the Bamar people, also known as Bama or Burmans in the spoken register and in the literary register."
They are still there - we must not forget this
8th May 2020 I put £25 on Con most seats at 1.79 - 100k deaths later and Brexit apparently going terribly and they’re 1.67. What would have to happen for Labour to win?!
I'm somewhat surprised to discover, even with the voting systems, that Labour have never quite managed a majority in the Senedd apparently.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1374139085061820416?s=21
I concede, though, that in your city environment it may be a little different.
Interesting that the Greens are below the LDs, despite the LDs doing even more poorly in Wales than the rest of Britain.
I agree we need to see more proof
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56491941
Kids in plastic bubbles...who could have guessed that signalling an easing of restrictions would result in a stampede.
However, emotionally, seeing reports from Bristol makes me want to join the police and go and give some crusties a kicking.
The protestors have managed to alienate me, and probably thousands of others, from a cause we initially supported.
I don't want the state to wield arbitrary power. But nor do I want the mob to wield arbitrary power.
Another couple of plod had a lucky escape when one of the rioters set light to the fuel tank of the van they were in.
From a Labour supporter it is disappointing that on the whole the Labour government here has had a decent pandemic, but the extra coverage it has had to normal hasn't done it any good.
If anyone would, it would be you
Rather than slavishly cleaving to each and every rule, we should instead recognize reality. So, as I have advised medical professionals in refugee camps, when you know you will not be able to enforce social distancing - for example at water distribution points in the camp, of which there are but few for many people and crowding necessarily prevails - think of which of the other elements of infection control you might boost or add in that setting to make up for the diminution of social distancing's contribution to infection control.
China will invade Taiwan within a decade, and very likely succeed. America won’t go total war with an equal enemy for Taiwan