"We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."
"Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."
Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."
No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.
What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
Not really.
"British jobs for British workers" is infinitely more xenophobic than anything written there.
"British jobs for British workers" versus "Promoting a Unifying British Identity".
Depends on intent and context. You can imagine both being said by the Far Right. And it's hard to imagine anyone but the Far Right pushing the 2nd one.
Are you are into the promotion of a "unifying national identity" btw?
What on earth is far right about wanting to unify rather than divide people? 🤔
I could imagine anyone pushing the second. A unifying national identity should include the best bits of your country - that is Tony Blair did with his flag waving "Cool Britannia".
What's the best of Britain that unifies us to you? Yes that's what politicians tend to put forwards in any mainstream party in any country around the globe. If you consider that "off" rather than "meaningless guff everyone should find agreeable" then I think your political antenna is a bit broken.
I was merely wondering if "promoting a unifying national identity" warmed your cockles. Seems it does. Doesn't do much for me, I must confess. But my cockles and yours are dissimilar, we know that. So no surprise there.
As to whether it's "off", this depends on what's meant by "identity".
And one has to get specific about it in order to tell. So, eg, if you wish a political party to promote a "Unifying English Identity" - which you do - what exactly does this mean to you?
Happy to defer any judgement until you flesh it out for me.
What does it mean to be united to be English? What does that mean to me?
A lot along the lines of stuff @Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers.
Equality before the law.
A free and fair judicial system.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after.
Respecting the rights of others.
Treating each other with respect.
Settling our differences politely and democratically.
Accepting that we may not always win or get our way, with grace and generosity of spirit.
On a more fun level.
Complaining about the weather, then losing our minds and enjoying ourselves when its sunny.
Cheering on the Three Lions, only to see them eliminated by penalties.
The England Cricket Team and taking on the Aussies in The Ashes.
Wanting to beat the other Home Nations but coming together with them with Team GB.
And most importantly for all
A healthy respect that what it means to be united to be English might be different between different people.
That others may disagree with any or all of my list or have other priorities and be just as English.
Well @kinabalu you asked me what my interpretation of a Unifying English Identity is but then haven't responded.
To you what is a Unifying English Identity?
Or since you find the term offensive, are you against politicians unifying people instead of dividing them?
Or are you against the notion of identity?
Or is the idea of English or British you find offensive?
None of those things I suspect. I imagine he just finds your posts very boring, or finds your attempts to justify your adherence to the unpleasant creed of English nationalism obnoxious. Good to see you took my advice on the skull motif though. Best to not advertise your extremism when you are trying hard to cover it up
We are in fact making progress. Philip is about to offer up some distinctive policies he'd like to see implemented to "Promote A Unified English Identity". I'm genuinely looking forward to seeing what he comes up with. Or am I? Yes, let's say I am.
I never said I was in favour of specific policies to do so, I said it was motherhood and apple pie.
You responded with pages of arguments before deciding that it was all ... Motherhood and apple pie.
So we're agreed in full. Took a few pages but you ended up using my own words. You agree with me, I can rest comfortable with that.
Ok, so you are not in favour of any specific policies to actively promote a Unified English Identity.
Thank heaven for that.
Oh no, I am.
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
Ah now you DO want some specific policies to promote a Unifying English Identity.
Ok so I ask you again - tell me a couple you'd like to see.
I see Andy Burnham won in every single ward in all 10 boroughs of Greater Manchester, some of those wards are really not typical Labour heartlands by any stretch.
On topic, will any B&S constituency polling be as heavily caveated here as the Hartlepool one was, given the success of the (Survation, was it?) poll there?
"We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."
"Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."
Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."
No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.
What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
Not really.
"British jobs for British workers" is infinitely more xenophobic than anything written there.
"British jobs for British workers" versus "Promoting a Unifying British Identity".
Depends on intent and context. You can imagine both being said by the Far Right. And it's hard to imagine anyone but the Far Right pushing the 2nd one.
Are you are into the promotion of a "unifying national identity" btw?
What on earth is far right about wanting to unify rather than divide people? 🤔
I could imagine anyone pushing the second. A unifying national identity should include the best bits of your country - that is Tony Blair did with his flag waving "Cool Britannia".
What's the best of Britain that unifies us to you? Yes that's what politicians tend to put forwards in any mainstream party in any country around the globe. If you consider that "off" rather than "meaningless guff everyone should find agreeable" then I think your political antenna is a bit broken.
I was merely wondering if "promoting a unifying national identity" warmed your cockles. Seems it does. Doesn't do much for me, I must confess. But my cockles and yours are dissimilar, we know that. So no surprise there.
As to whether it's "off", this depends on what's meant by "identity".
And one has to get specific about it in order to tell. So, eg, if you wish a political party to promote a "Unifying English Identity" - which you do - what exactly does this mean to you?
Happy to defer any judgement until you flesh it out for me.
What does it mean to be united to be English? What does that mean to me?
A lot along the lines of stuff @Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers.
Equality before the law.
A free and fair judicial system.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after.
Respecting the rights of others.
Treating each other with respect.
Settling our differences politely and democratically.
Accepting that we may not always win or get our way, with grace and generosity of spirit.
On a more fun level.
Complaining about the weather, then losing our minds and enjoying ourselves when its sunny.
Cheering on the Three Lions, only to see them eliminated by penalties.
The England Cricket Team and taking on the Aussies in The Ashes.
Wanting to beat the other Home Nations but coming together with them with Team GB.
And most importantly for all
A healthy respect that what it means to be united to be English might be different between different people.
That others may disagree with any or all of my list or have other priorities and be just as English.
That's all a bit motherhood and apple pie.
Give me a couple of actual distinctive policies you'd implement in order to "Promote A Unified English Identity".
You need to identify with the land, history, heritage, culture and people - there are different ways of doing that.
It's a menu, and we'll all pick different things from it.
I could certainly give you my list, but that would be to invite disagreement as it would suggest that unless others agreed with it all they weren't "English".
Ok, but remember the idea being mulled is the active promotion of a UNIFIED English Identity.
What's the U word mean there, do we think?
There are certainly many similarities you and I would share, culturally, if we met in person - notwithstanding our different politics.
And we do have a culture here - it's just we can't see it very well, although it's more noticeable when you go aboard.
Foreigners do far better. The best book is Watching the English: the hidden rules of English behaviour by Kate Fox.
Yes, it's very difficult to see your culture when you're in it.
Indeed, and due to British/ English exceptionalism (shared by us all on some level, even if we don't know it) we tend to think our values and culture are "normal" or "standard", hence the motherhood & apple pie way of describing ourselves, when they are actually quite distinctive and anything but.
Precisely.
Take my list of what a Unified English Identity is to me, after Kinabalu asked, and then go to Xinjiang, China. See how much of the list applies there. Or go to Hong Kong and see how much of the list used to apply there, versus how much still does now. 😕
What we have is something precious to keep. Not be taken for granted.
What you have to remember is that because @kinabalu for some unknown reason is very insecure he is invested in belittling your views of nationality and what it means to be British.
He does this because as a working class lad made good (very good) and now moved away from his roots, he is confused about what he is supposed to think about these things. He feels he should condemn anyone who even mentions nationality and being British but has no views himself on them.
And hence when he bumps into someone like you, someone he believes he is far more successful and intelligent than, but someone who is far more confident in their own opinions on such to him delicate and taboo subjects, he has literally no answer.
Opposition Leader Satisfied Dissatisfied Net satisfaction Date of poll % % % Thatcher 38 51 -13 Nov 1978 Foot 13 69 -56 Aug 1982 Kinnock 27 61 -34 Dec 1988 Smith 33 41 -8 May 1993 Blair 42 35 +7 Sep 1996 Hague 19 56 -37 Jan 2000 Duncan Smith 16 53 -37 Feb 2003 Howard 23 49 -26 Jun 2005 Cameron 23 45 -22 Sep 2007 Miliband 25 63 -38 Dec 2014 Corbyn 17 72 -55 Feb 2019 Either it's a blip, or Starmer's toast.
The only saving grace for Starmer is that the last 14 months the polls have been largely driven by the pandemic.
If this is the norm for the post pandemic phase then he's like a stepmom on Pornhub.
The only question is does the PLP have the desire to remove him?
I keep coming back to the question, that nobody's really answered - who would you replace him with?
Major Dan Jarvis.
Well quite. Personable, sane, doesn't keep banging on about Palestine. But does he want the job? All the signs I've seen are that he doesn't.
I've never heard Dan Jarvis speak, or what he really is like. All I know is that he was in the armed forces and that is why many think he could be good for Labour. The image of an ex squaddie might play well with the public. Other than that I don't know.
He's not strictly speaking a squaddie. He was an officer. BUT, and it's quite a big but, no one really thinks like that when you're talking about a Para or a Marine. He was the former. Pretty hard core.
I've a Labour friend from Barnsley who has been banging on about Jarvis for what feels like years and years.
How's Jarvis going to get past the membership vote though? Surely he will be viewed with suspicion by the bien pensants of N London and Middling University Labour club?
I just looked ta his Wiki page. he looks far too electable to be elected to Labour Leader. Absolutely no chance.
The next leader absolutely must be a woman apparently.
Hope you're not somebody who manages to ridicule Labour (i) for never having a woman leader and (ii) for thinking they have to pick a woman leader.
Because some people do manage that, would you believe.
Its entirely possible and consistent to ridicule Labour for both. The Tories have had a woman leader elected who was a tremendous success who was elected because of her own merits, not because she was a woman.
Labour should not pick a leader just because she's female, but equally true to say there ought to have been plenty of good quality female MPs who could have become leader down the years.
My dad said Labour missed a chance with Barbara Castle.
No disrespect to your dad, but no. IMO, she would have been as electorally attractive as J Corbyn, even though she was, unlike Corbyn, very bright. Shirley Williams was a different matter, except she felt the need to defect. She was highly intelligent and charismatic. She would have given Mrs T a run for her money.
Barbara Castle was very popular in the second half of the 1960s and a credible possible successor to Wilson had he met his demise at the time.
The first political comment I remember hearing was my Mam telling Dad "They should have had Red Barbara!"
Was this before or after "In Place of Strife"?
Which was quite controversial politically within the Labour Party, and rather dented Barbara Castle's career? Even if it was (or may well have been) the right . . . err . . . correct way to go?
Should imagine, given my age, that it might have been a response to the surprise Tory win in 1970. But that's a guess.
In Place of Strife was the way to go. Unfortunately it put in place strife.
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
I agree with all of those, and would gladly help you in any campaign for them. They don't strike me as uniquely English or British - arguably Denmark, of the countries that I know well, epitomises them more completely. As a programme for a Britain that we can all feel comfortable in, though, that's excellent.
Stop being miserable. Mr PT's list is of course akin to the ideas of any sensible state. Denmark is a great example. The UK is however the best example. We fall short in many areas of course.
Re: the English, when I said up thread that one thing world associates most strongly with England is parliamentary democracy, that's true, but should have added - representative government.
US has Congress & separation of powers in order to NOT have an all or mostly powerful Parliament. But we embraced - indeed demanded - representative government right from the get-go.
For which we have you to thank!
And still do, even after Donald Trump's attempt to copy Oliver Cromwell.
"We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."
"Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."
Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."
No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.
What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
Not really.
"British jobs for British workers" is infinitely more xenophobic than anything written there.
"British jobs for British workers" versus "Promoting a Unifying British Identity".
Depends on intent and context. You can imagine both being said by the Far Right. And it's hard to imagine anyone but the Far Right pushing the 2nd one.
Are you are into the promotion of a "unifying national identity" btw?
What on earth is far right about wanting to unify rather than divide people? 🤔
I could imagine anyone pushing the second. A unifying national identity should include the best bits of your country - that is Tony Blair did with his flag waving "Cool Britannia".
What's the best of Britain that unifies us to you? Yes that's what politicians tend to put forwards in any mainstream party in any country around the globe. If you consider that "off" rather than "meaningless guff everyone should find agreeable" then I think your political antenna is a bit broken.
I was merely wondering if "promoting a unifying national identity" warmed your cockles. Seems it does. Doesn't do much for me, I must confess. But my cockles and yours are dissimilar, we know that. So no surprise there.
As to whether it's "off", this depends on what's meant by "identity".
And one has to get specific about it in order to tell. So, eg, if you wish a political party to promote a "Unifying English Identity" - which you do - what exactly does this mean to you?
Happy to defer any judgement until you flesh it out for me.
What does it mean to be united to be English? What does that mean to me?
A lot along the lines of stuff @Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers.
Equality before the law.
A free and fair judicial system.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after.
Respecting the rights of others.
Treating each other with respect.
Settling our differences politely and democratically.
Accepting that we may not always win or get our way, with grace and generosity of spirit.
On a more fun level.
Complaining about the weather, then losing our minds and enjoying ourselves when its sunny.
Cheering on the Three Lions, only to see them eliminated by penalties.
The England Cricket Team and taking on the Aussies in The Ashes.
Wanting to beat the other Home Nations but coming together with them with Team GB.
And most importantly for all
A healthy respect that what it means to be united to be English might be different between different people.
That others may disagree with any or all of my list or have other priorities and be just as English.
Well @kinabalu you asked me what my interpretation of a Unifying English Identity is but then haven't responded.
To you what is a Unifying English Identity?
Or since you find the term offensive, are you against politicians unifying people instead of dividing them?
Or are you against the notion of identity?
Or is the idea of English or British you find offensive?
None of those things I suspect. I imagine he just finds your posts very boring, or finds your attempts to justify your adherence to the unpleasant creed of English nationalism obnoxious. Good to see you took my advice on the skull motif though. Best to not advertise your extremism when you are trying hard to cover it up
We are in fact making progress. Philip is about to offer up some distinctive policies he'd like to see implemented to "Promote A Unified English Identity". I'm genuinely looking forward to seeing what he comes up with. Or am I? Yes, let's say I am.
I never said I was in favour of specific policies to do so, I said it was motherhood and apple pie.
You responded with pages of arguments before deciding that it was all ... Motherhood and apple pie.
So we're agreed in full. Took a few pages but you ended up using my own words. You agree with me, I can rest comfortable with that.
Ok, so you are not in favour of any specific policies to actively promote a Unified English Identity.
Thank heaven for that.
Oh no, I am.
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
That's a big difference between you and me. You are more traditional than I am and consider the land etc important. I don't. That's why I don't see it as a big deal if parts of the country choose to go independent.
I consider it the people who choose to live here that make the country. I view the country as a living evolving nation that evolves with the people that live here. As immigrants arrive they rub off and influence the country just as much as the country influences them, and we are better off for it.
But others disagree. As I finished my list with, it includes respecting the fact others have different opinions. I understand and respect your opinion, even though I don't share it. I hope for most people the feeling can be mutual.
I don't think the first bit is even up for discussion - it's simply a fact.
All forms of patriotism start with identifying with the land. That gives a country its boundaries and borders and is how it starts.
That doesn't preclude immigration of course or its character changing but those immigrants in turn, over time, will also identify with the land.
I think some people confuse this with exclusive "blood and soil" stuff, which it definitely isn't.
Looks pretty stupid to me. And surely quite a waste of money?
Welcome. I'm not so sure. They will be a nice addition to the tube experience. Although it is a bit gilding the lily as the original London Underground designs are timeless and design classics.
I haven't seen any other signs, if there are others, but that one just looks lazy by Hockney; like he really didn't care.
"We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."
"Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."
Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."
No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.
What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
Not really.
"British jobs for British workers" is infinitely more xenophobic than anything written there.
"British jobs for British workers" versus "Promoting a Unifying British Identity".
Depends on intent and context. You can imagine both being said by the Far Right. And it's hard to imagine anyone but the Far Right pushing the 2nd one.
Are you are into the promotion of a "unifying national identity" btw?
What on earth is far right about wanting to unify rather than divide people? 🤔
I could imagine anyone pushing the second. A unifying national identity should include the best bits of your country - that is Tony Blair did with his flag waving "Cool Britannia".
What's the best of Britain that unifies us to you? Yes that's what politicians tend to put forwards in any mainstream party in any country around the globe. If you consider that "off" rather than "meaningless guff everyone should find agreeable" then I think your political antenna is a bit broken.
I was merely wondering if "promoting a unifying national identity" warmed your cockles. Seems it does. Doesn't do much for me, I must confess. But my cockles and yours are dissimilar, we know that. So no surprise there.
As to whether it's "off", this depends on what's meant by "identity".
And one has to get specific about it in order to tell. So, eg, if you wish a political party to promote a "Unifying English Identity" - which you do - what exactly does this mean to you?
Happy to defer any judgement until you flesh it out for me.
What does it mean to be united to be English? What does that mean to me?
A lot along the lines of stuff @Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers.
Equality before the law.
A free and fair judicial system.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after.
Respecting the rights of others.
Treating each other with respect.
Settling our differences politely and democratically.
Accepting that we may not always win or get our way, with grace and generosity of spirit.
On a more fun level.
Complaining about the weather, then losing our minds and enjoying ourselves when its sunny.
Cheering on the Three Lions, only to see them eliminated by penalties.
The England Cricket Team and taking on the Aussies in The Ashes.
Wanting to beat the other Home Nations but coming together with them with Team GB.
And most importantly for all
A healthy respect that what it means to be united to be English might be different between different people.
That others may disagree with any or all of my list or have other priorities and be just as English.
That's all a bit motherhood and apple pie.
Give me a couple of actual distinctive policies you'd implement in order to "Promote A Unified English Identity".
You need to identify with the land, history, heritage, culture and people - there are different ways of doing that.
It's a menu, and we'll all pick different things from it.
I could certainly give you my list, but that would be to invite disagreement as it would suggest that unless others agreed with it all they weren't "English".
Ok, but remember the idea being mulled is the active promotion of a UNIFIED English Identity.
What's the U word mean there, do we think?
There are certainly many similarities you and I would share, culturally, if we met in person - notwithstanding our different politics.
And we do have a culture here - it's just we can't see it very well, although it's more noticeable when you go aboard.
Foreigners do far better. The best book is Watching the English: the hidden rules of English behaviour by Kate Fox.
Yes, it's very difficult to see your culture when you're in it.
Indeed, and due to British/ English exceptionalism (shared by us all on some level, even if we don't know it) we tend to think our values and culture are "normal" or "standard", hence the motherhood & apple pie way of describing ourselves, when they are actually quite distinctive and anything but.
Precisely.
Take my list of what a Unified English Identity is to me, after Kinabalu asked, and then go to Xinjiang, China. See how much of the list applies there. Or go to Hong Kong and see how much of the list used to apply there, versus how much still does now. 😕
What we have is something precious to keep. Not be taken for granted.
What you have to remember is that because @kinabalu for some unknown reason is very insecure he is invested in belittling your views of nationality and what it means to be British.
He does this because as a working class lad made good (very good) and now moved away from his roots, he is confused about what he is supposed to think about these things. He feels he should condemn anyone who even mentions nationality and being British but has no views himself on them.
And hence when he bumps into someone like you, someone he believes he is far more successful and intelligent than, but someone who is far more confident in their own opinions on such to him delicate and taboo subjects, he has literally no answer.
"We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."
"Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."
Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."
No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.
What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
Not really.
"British jobs for British workers" is infinitely more xenophobic than anything written there.
"British jobs for British workers" versus "Promoting a Unifying British Identity".
Depends on intent and context. You can imagine both being said by the Far Right. And it's hard to imagine anyone but the Far Right pushing the 2nd one.
Are you are into the promotion of a "unifying national identity" btw?
What on earth is far right about wanting to unify rather than divide people? 🤔
I could imagine anyone pushing the second. A unifying national identity should include the best bits of your country - that is Tony Blair did with his flag waving "Cool Britannia".
What's the best of Britain that unifies us to you? Yes that's what politicians tend to put forwards in any mainstream party in any country around the globe. If you consider that "off" rather than "meaningless guff everyone should find agreeable" then I think your political antenna is a bit broken.
I was merely wondering if "promoting a unifying national identity" warmed your cockles. Seems it does. Doesn't do much for me, I must confess. But my cockles and yours are dissimilar, we know that. So no surprise there.
As to whether it's "off", this depends on what's meant by "identity".
And one has to get specific about it in order to tell. So, eg, if you wish a political party to promote a "Unifying English Identity" - which you do - what exactly does this mean to you?
Happy to defer any judgement until you flesh it out for me.
What does it mean to be united to be English? What does that mean to me?
A lot along the lines of stuff @Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers.
Equality before the law.
A free and fair judicial system.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after.
Respecting the rights of others.
Treating each other with respect.
Settling our differences politely and democratically.
Accepting that we may not always win or get our way, with grace and generosity of spirit.
On a more fun level.
Complaining about the weather, then losing our minds and enjoying ourselves when its sunny.
Cheering on the Three Lions, only to see them eliminated by penalties.
The England Cricket Team and taking on the Aussies in The Ashes.
Wanting to beat the other Home Nations but coming together with them with Team GB.
And most importantly for all
A healthy respect that what it means to be united to be English might be different between different people.
That others may disagree with any or all of my list or have other priorities and be just as English.
Well @kinabalu you asked me what my interpretation of a Unifying English Identity is but then haven't responded.
To you what is a Unifying English Identity?
Or since you find the term offensive, are you against politicians unifying people instead of dividing them?
Or are you against the notion of identity?
Or is the idea of English or British you find offensive?
None of those things I suspect. I imagine he just finds your posts very boring, or finds your attempts to justify your adherence to the unpleasant creed of English nationalism obnoxious. Good to see you took my advice on the skull motif though. Best to not advertise your extremism when you are trying hard to cover it up
We are in fact making progress. Philip is about to offer up some distinctive policies he'd like to see implemented to "Promote A Unified English Identity". I'm genuinely looking forward to seeing what he comes up with. Or am I? Yes, let's say I am.
I never said I was in favour of specific policies to do so, I said it was motherhood and apple pie.
You responded with pages of arguments before deciding that it was all ... Motherhood and apple pie.
So we're agreed in full. Took a few pages but you ended up using my own words. You agree with me, I can rest comfortable with that.
Ok, so you are not in favour of any specific policies to actively promote a Unified English Identity.
Thank heaven for that.
Oh no, I am.
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
That's a big difference between you and me. You are more traditional than I am and consider the land etc important. I don't. That's why I don't see it as a big deal if parts of the country choose to go independent.
I consider it the people who choose to live here that make the country. I view the country as a living evolving nation that evolves with the people that live here. As immigrants arrive they rub off and influence the country just as much as the country influences them, and we are better off for it.
But others disagree. As I finished my list with, it includes respecting the fact others have different opinions. I understand and respect your opinion, even though I don't share it. I hope for most people the feeling can be mutual.
I don't think the first bit is even up for discussion - it's simply a fact.
All forms of patriotism start with identifying with the land. That gives a country its boundaries and borders and is how it starts.
That doesn't preclude immigration of course or its character changing but those immigrants in turn, over time, will also identify with the land.
I think some people confuse this with exclusive "blood and soil" stuff, which it definitely isn't.
Whoah...
Are you saying there wasn't a pan-Jewish patriotism that predated the State of Israel?
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
I agree with all of those, and would gladly help you in any campaign for them. They don't strike me as uniquely English or British - arguably Denmark, of the countries that I know well, epitomises them more completely. As a programme for a Britain that we can all feel comfortable in, though, that's excellent.
Beating the shit out of small countries, and not feeling ashamed about it. That's England. We are a warrior nation. We still are, though we have sublimated these feelings into political exceptionalism and sport
How on earth have BF not managed to have a Starmer exit market. I've tried twice to get them to do so, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone. If only smarkets was other than awful.
"We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."
"Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."
Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."
No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.
What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
Not really.
"British jobs for British workers" is infinitely more xenophobic than anything written there.
"British jobs for British workers" versus "Promoting a Unifying British Identity".
Depends on intent and context. You can imagine both being said by the Far Right. And it's hard to imagine anyone but the Far Right pushing the 2nd one.
Are you are into the promotion of a "unifying national identity" btw?
What on earth is far right about wanting to unify rather than divide people? 🤔
I could imagine anyone pushing the second. A unifying national identity should include the best bits of your country - that is Tony Blair did with his flag waving "Cool Britannia".
What's the best of Britain that unifies us to you? Yes that's what politicians tend to put forwards in any mainstream party in any country around the globe. If you consider that "off" rather than "meaningless guff everyone should find agreeable" then I think your political antenna is a bit broken.
I was merely wondering if "promoting a unifying national identity" warmed your cockles. Seems it does. Doesn't do much for me, I must confess. But my cockles and yours are dissimilar, we know that. So no surprise there.
As to whether it's "off", this depends on what's meant by "identity".
And one has to get specific about it in order to tell. So, eg, if you wish a political party to promote a "Unifying English Identity" - which you do - what exactly does this mean to you?
Happy to defer any judgement until you flesh it out for me.
What does it mean to be united to be English? What does that mean to me?
A lot along the lines of stuff @Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers.
Equality before the law.
A free and fair judicial system.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after.
Respecting the rights of others.
Treating each other with respect.
Settling our differences politely and democratically.
Accepting that we may not always win or get our way, with grace and generosity of spirit.
On a more fun level.
Complaining about the weather, then losing our minds and enjoying ourselves when its sunny.
Cheering on the Three Lions, only to see them eliminated by penalties.
The England Cricket Team and taking on the Aussies in The Ashes.
Wanting to beat the other Home Nations but coming together with them with Team GB.
And most importantly for all
A healthy respect that what it means to be united to be English might be different between different people.
That others may disagree with any or all of my list or have other priorities and be just as English.
Well @kinabalu you asked me what my interpretation of a Unifying English Identity is but then haven't responded.
To you what is a Unifying English Identity?
Or since you find the term offensive, are you against politicians unifying people instead of dividing them?
Or are you against the notion of identity?
Or is the idea of English or British you find offensive?
None of those things I suspect. I imagine he just finds your posts very boring, or finds your attempts to justify your adherence to the unpleasant creed of English nationalism obnoxious. Good to see you took my advice on the skull motif though. Best to not advertise your extremism when you are trying hard to cover it up
We are in fact making progress. Philip is about to offer up some distinctive policies he'd like to see implemented to "Promote A Unified English Identity". I'm genuinely looking forward to seeing what he comes up with. Or am I? Yes, let's say I am.
I never said I was in favour of specific policies to do so, I said it was motherhood and apple pie.
You responded with pages of arguments before deciding that it was all ... Motherhood and apple pie.
So we're agreed in full. Took a few pages but you ended up using my own words. You agree with me, I can rest comfortable with that.
Ok, so you are not in favour of any specific policies to actively promote a Unified English Identity.
Thank heaven for that.
Oh no, I am.
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
That's a big difference between you and me. You are more traditional than I am and consider the land etc important. I don't. That's why I don't see it as a big deal if parts of the country choose to go independent.
I consider it the people who choose to live here that make the country. I view the country as a living evolving nation that evolves with the people that live here. As immigrants arrive they rub off and influence the country just as much as the country influences them, and we are better off for it.
But others disagree. As I finished my list with, it includes respecting the fact others have different opinions. I understand and respect your opinion, even though I don't share it. I hope for most people the feeling can be mutual.
I don't think the first bit is even up for discussion - it's simply a fact.
All forms of patriotism start with identifying with the land. That gives a country its boundaries and borders and is how it starts.
That doesn't preclude immigration of course or its character changing but those immigrants in turn, over time, will also identify with the land.
I think some people confuse this with exclusive "blood and soil" stuff, which it definitely isn't.
Whoah...
Are you saying there wasn't a pan-Jewish patriotism that predated the State of Israel?
You mean Zionism? That was attached to a historical sense of the state of Israel.
Let me try making the argument another way: there has to be a geography or boundary. Otherwise you could simply, as Nick Palmer says, tick off exactly the same policies and values in Denmark and they would also be "English".
There has to be a sense of place. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.
Opposition Leader Satisfied Dissatisfied Net satisfaction Date of poll % % % Thatcher 38 51 -13 Nov 1978 Foot 13 69 -56 Aug 1982 Kinnock 27 61 -34 Dec 1988 Smith 33 41 -8 May 1993 Blair 42 35 +7 Sep 1996 Hague 19 56 -37 Jan 2000 Duncan Smith 16 53 -37 Feb 2003 Howard 23 49 -26 Jun 2005 Cameron 23 45 -22 Sep 2007 Miliband 25 63 -38 Dec 2014 Corbyn 17 72 -55 Feb 2019 Either it's a blip, or Starmer's toast.
The only saving grace for Starmer is that the last 14 months the polls have been largely driven by the pandemic.
If this is the norm for the post pandemic phase then he's like a stepmom on Pornhub.
The only question is does the PLP have the desire to remove him?
I keep coming back to the question, that nobody's really answered - who would you replace him with?
Major Dan Jarvis.
Well quite. Personable, sane, doesn't keep banging on about Palestine. But does he want the job? All the signs I've seen are that he doesn't.
I've never heard Dan Jarvis speak, or what he really is like. All I know is that he was in the armed forces and that is why many think he could be good for Labour. The image of an ex squaddie might play well with the public. Other than that I don't know.
He's not strictly speaking a squaddie. He was an officer. BUT, and it's quite a big but, no one really thinks like that when you're talking about a Para or a Marine. He was the former. Pretty hard core.
I've a Labour friend from Barnsley who has been banging on about Jarvis for what feels like years and years.
How's Jarvis going to get past the membership vote though? Surely he will be viewed with suspicion by the bien pensants of N London and Middling University Labour club?
I just looked ta his Wiki page. he looks far too electable to be elected to Labour Leader. Absolutely no chance.
The next leader absolutely must be a woman apparently.
Hope you're not somebody who manages to ridicule Labour (i) for never having a woman leader and (ii) for thinking they have to pick a woman leader.
Because some people do manage that, would you believe.
Its entirely possible and consistent to ridicule Labour for both. The Tories have had a woman leader elected who was a tremendous success who was elected because of her own merits, not because she was a woman.
Labour should not pick a leader just because she's female, but equally true to say there ought to have been plenty of good quality female MPs who could have become leader down the years.
My dad said Labour missed a chance with Barbara Castle.
No disrespect to your dad, but no. IMO, she would have been as electorally attractive as J Corbyn, even though she was, unlike Corbyn, very bright. Shirley Williams was a different matter, except she felt the need to defect. She was highly intelligent and charismatic. She would have given Mrs T a run for her money.
Barbara Castle was very popular in the second half of the 1960s and a credible possible successor to Wilson had he met his demise at the time.
Paul Rose, who acted as Parliamentary Private Secretary to Castle between 1966 and 1968, later claimed that after his visit to the six counties in 1967, she asked why a young man like him was concerned about Northern Ireland, “’What about Vietnam? What about Rhodesia?’ I just looked at her with incomprehension and said ‘You’ll see when they start shooting one another’. She was totally oblivious to this. I think their priorities were focused on other things to the extent that they were totally blinded as to what was going on in their own backyard”. Perhaps it was not so surprising that two years later, on 14th August 1969, Barbara Castle wrote in her diary that she “was astonished to learn from the news that British troops have moved into Derry”.
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
The song quoted by @SandyRentool, "Man In the Corner Shop" is off a Jam album called "Sound Affects" that is a bit of a soundtrack to being Working Class in my opinion... in 1980! My favourite album of theirs and I think it stands the test of time
Far k'nell. As a very callow youth I went to see the Jam at Poplar Town Hall it could have been my first ever gig - 1977 I just googled. All I remember was an awful lot of working class folk with very short hair and Harringtons having a huge scrap on the platform of Poplar tube station and onesuch, in the midst of it all, running past me, pausing - was I going to get a smack? - realising I was very young, and running on to attack someone else.
Happy days!
Jesus. You and I are almost exactly the same vintage. My first "big" gig was Malvern Winter Gardens, the Jam. About 1977? Same tour?!
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
This is where I struggle - as I said yesterday, there are many Englands - the bit of England in which I live is, I sense, very different from where some others on here reside.
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
"We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."
"Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."
Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."
No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.
What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
Not really.
"British jobs for British workers" is infinitely more xenophobic than anything written there.
"British jobs for British workers" versus "Promoting a Unifying British Identity".
Depends on intent and context. You can imagine both being said by the Far Right. And it's hard to imagine anyone but the Far Right pushing the 2nd one.
Are you are into the promotion of a "unifying national identity" btw?
What on earth is far right about wanting to unify rather than divide people? 🤔
I could imagine anyone pushing the second. A unifying national identity should include the best bits of your country - that is Tony Blair did with his flag waving "Cool Britannia".
What's the best of Britain that unifies us to you? Yes that's what politicians tend to put forwards in any mainstream party in any country around the globe. If you consider that "off" rather than "meaningless guff everyone should find agreeable" then I think your political antenna is a bit broken.
I was merely wondering if "promoting a unifying national identity" warmed your cockles. Seems it does. Doesn't do much for me, I must confess. But my cockles and yours are dissimilar, we know that. So no surprise there.
As to whether it's "off", this depends on what's meant by "identity".
And one has to get specific about it in order to tell. So, eg, if you wish a political party to promote a "Unifying English Identity" - which you do - what exactly does this mean to you?
Happy to defer any judgement until you flesh it out for me.
What does it mean to be united to be English? What does that mean to me?
A lot along the lines of stuff @Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers.
Equality before the law.
A free and fair judicial system.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after.
Respecting the rights of others.
Treating each other with respect.
Settling our differences politely and democratically.
Accepting that we may not always win or get our way, with grace and generosity of spirit.
On a more fun level.
Complaining about the weather, then losing our minds and enjoying ourselves when its sunny.
Cheering on the Three Lions, only to see them eliminated by penalties.
The England Cricket Team and taking on the Aussies in The Ashes.
Wanting to beat the other Home Nations but coming together with them with Team GB.
And most importantly for all
A healthy respect that what it means to be united to be English might be different between different people.
That others may disagree with any or all of my list or have other priorities and be just as English.
Well @kinabalu you asked me what my interpretation of a Unifying English Identity is but then haven't responded.
To you what is a Unifying English Identity?
Or since you find the term offensive, are you against politicians unifying people instead of dividing them?
Or are you against the notion of identity?
Or is the idea of English or British you find offensive?
None of those things I suspect. I imagine he just finds your posts very boring, or finds your attempts to justify your adherence to the unpleasant creed of English nationalism obnoxious. Good to see you took my advice on the skull motif though. Best to not advertise your extremism when you are trying hard to cover it up
We are in fact making progress. Philip is about to offer up some distinctive policies he'd like to see implemented to "Promote A Unified English Identity". I'm genuinely looking forward to seeing what he comes up with. Or am I? Yes, let's say I am.
I never said I was in favour of specific policies to do so, I said it was motherhood and apple pie.
You responded with pages of arguments before deciding that it was all ... Motherhood and apple pie.
So we're agreed in full. Took a few pages but you ended up using my own words. You agree with me, I can rest comfortable with that.
Ok, so you are not in favour of any specific policies to actively promote a Unified English Identity.
Thank heaven for that.
Oh no, I am.
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
That's a big difference between you and me. You are more traditional than I am and consider the land etc important. I don't. That's why I don't see it as a big deal if parts of the country choose to go independent.
I consider it the people who choose to live here that make the country. I view the country as a living evolving nation that evolves with the people that live here. As immigrants arrive they rub off and influence the country just as much as the country influences them, and we are better off for it.
But others disagree. As I finished my list with, it includes respecting the fact others have different opinions. I understand and respect your opinion, even though I don't share it. I hope for most people the feeling can be mutual.
I don't think the first bit is even up for discussion - it's simply a fact.
All forms of patriotism start with identifying with the land. That gives a country its boundaries and borders and is how it starts.
That doesn't preclude immigration of course or its character changing but those immigrants in turn, over time, will also identify with the land.
I think some people confuse this with exclusive "blood and soil" stuff, which it definitely isn't.
Whoah...
Are you saying there wasn't a pan-Jewish patriotism that predated the State of Israel?
You mean Zionism? That was attached to a historical sense of the state of Israel.
Let me try making the argument another way: there has to be a geography or boundary. Otherwise you could simply, as Nick Palmer says, tick off exactly the same policies and values in Denmark and they would also be "English".
There has to be a sense of place. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.
The song quoted by @SandyRentool, "Man In the Corner Shop" is off a Jam album called "Sound Affects" that is a bit of a soundtrack to being Working Class in my opinion... in 1980! My favourite album of theirs and I think it stands the test of time
Far k'nell. As a very callow youth I went to see the Jam at Poplar Town Hall it could have been my first ever gig - 1977 I just googled. All I remember was an awful lot of working class folk with very short hair and Harringtons having a huge scrap on the platform of Poplar tube station and onesuch, in the midst of it all, running past me, pausing - was I going to get a smack? - realising I was very young, and running on to attack someone else.
Happy days!
Jesus. You and I are almost exactly the same vintage. My first "big" gig was Malvern Winter Gardens, the Jam. About 1977? Same tour?!
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
This is where I struggle - as I said yesterday, there are many Englands - the bit of England in which I live is, I sense, very different from where some others on here reside.
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
Obviously you are right to say that defining a nationality is inherently difficult. My problem is that I get the feeling that you think it’s peculiar to England. It isn’t.
What I would say is that the extent to which regional identities are strong varies dramatically across England. I’ll be honest, I don’t have a regional identity despite living in Woking almost of my life. By contrast, the Merseyside identity is very strong.
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
I agree with all of those, and would gladly help you in any campaign for them. They don't strike me as uniquely English or British - arguably Denmark, of the countries that I know well, epitomises them more completely. As a programme for a Britain that we can all feel comfortable in, though, that's excellent.
Beating the shit out of small countries, and not feeling ashamed about it. That's England. We are a warrior nation. We still are, though we have sublimated these feelings into political exceptionalism and sport
Not necessarily sure that that's what I'd add to my list of English cultural norms, but a welcome addition to the debate nonetheless.
I'd say Englishness, or Britishness, is more noticeable when you see something that isn't it. The Batley Grammar School incident, for example. Because here, religion doesn't justify trading other norms like freedom of speech. That's not solely true of Britain, but it is far from universal in the world.
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
Which brings us to the interesting concept of denial of things people don't want to be true. There is a True Faith of the Anti-Anti-Ballistic-Missile church - people who believe that you can never stop ballistic weapons. Hilariously, they have tried to claim that Iron Dome (limited though it is) can't work, actually misses everything, or costs 10 trillion dollars. Often all of the above.
This is because they are ideologically opposed to anti-ballistic weapons.
The mental processes involved are fascinating.
I once watched as someone created a whole new denial in response to a scientific fact we were discussing. I wish I could have videoed it.
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
This is where I struggle - as I said yesterday, there are many Englands - the bit of England in which I live is, I sense, very different from where some others on here reside.
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
Obviously you are right to say that defining a nationality is inherently difficult. My problem is that I get the feeling that you think it’s peculiar to England. It isn’t.
What I would say is that the extent to which regional identities are strong varies dramatically across England. I’ll be honest, I don’t have a regional identity despite living in Woking almost of my life. By contrast, the Merseyside identity is very strong.
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
This is where I struggle - as I said yesterday, there are many Englands - the bit of England in which I live is, I sense, very different from where some others on here reside.
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
I'll have a go, using Bill Buford, from Among the Thugs, his description of his years as an English football hooligan. He's in a stramash in Italy, fleeing down the road, and being chased by cops:
"Someone shouted that we were all English. Why are we running? The English don't run. And so it went on. Having fled in panic, some of the supporters would then remember that they were English and this was important, and they would remind the others that they too were English, and this was important, and with renewed sense of national identity, they would come abruptly to a halt, turn around, and charge the Italian police"
That, basically, is Brexit. We ran away for forty years then we remembered who we are.
That is us. A confused rabble, often uncouth, and yet, we finally turn and fight. And generally we win
A lot along the lines of stuff Cyclefree has a tendency to put in her thread headers. - she has written many political suggestions I agree.
Equality before the law. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Many laws passed I support on this issue.
A free and fair judicial system. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Agree with Cyclefree the backlog on justice etc is a very bad thing and this needs sorting out.
A free and fair Parliamentary democracy. - Policies to ensure this is protected. Against changes in electoral system etc that could mess with this.
That all people, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religion or anything else are free and equal. - Again support policies to support this. Again supported laws for years on this.
Welcoming anyone who comes to make this country their home. - Support policies ensuring this. Against those who campaign to do otherwise.
Generosity of spirit both at home and abroad. Giving aid to those who need it. - A good example of this is charities like Children in Need etc, policies like Gift Aid to facilitate and support this.
That anyone who gets sick in this country will be looked after. - Is the NHS not a policy area for you? Seriously?
Etc etc etc
Why would you NOT want policies to support these issues and to unify people? Of course you SHOULD not Thank God you don't.
I agree with all of those, and would gladly help you in any campaign for them. They don't strike me as uniquely English or British - arguably Denmark, of the countries that I know well, epitomises them more completely. As a programme for a Britain that we can all feel comfortable in, though, that's excellent.
Beating the shit out of small countries, and not feeling ashamed about it. That's England. We are a warrior nation. We still are, though we have sublimated these feelings into political exceptionalism and sport
Not necessarily sure that that's what I'd add to my list of English cultural norms, but a welcome addition to the debate nonetheless.
I'd say Englishness, or Britishness, is more noticeable when you see something that isn't it. The Batley Grammar School incident, for example. Because here, religion doesn't justify trading other norms like freedom of speech. That's not solely true of Britain, but it is far from universal in the world.
On a more edifying note, I want to encourage anyone interested in what British culture is to go to Blackpool. Over the road from the tower there is a massive art installation in the pavement - basically it's punchline after punchline after punchline. And every British person will know what almost all of it is about. It will be utterly impenetrable to most foreigners,even Anglophone ones. It's brilliant - my favourite piece of public art in the country.
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
This is where I struggle - as I said yesterday, there are many Englands - the bit of England in which I live is, I sense, very different from where some others on here reside.
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
Obviously you are right to say that defining a nationality is inherently difficult. My problem is that I get the feeling that you think it’s peculiar to England. It isn’t.
What I would say is that the extent to which regional identities are strong varies dramatically across England. I’ll be honest, I don’t have a regional identity despite living in Woking almost of my life. By contrast, the Merseyside identity is very strong.
Is Woking exceptionally-especially woke?
Not especially. It’s basically a permanent building site.
Opposition Leader Satisfied Dissatisfied Net satisfaction Date of poll % % % Thatcher 38 51 -13 Nov 1978 Foot 13 69 -56 Aug 1982 Kinnock 27 61 -34 Dec 1988 Smith 33 41 -8 May 1993 Blair 42 35 +7 Sep 1996 Hague 19 56 -37 Jan 2000 Duncan Smith 16 53 -37 Feb 2003 Howard 23 49 -26 Jun 2005 Cameron 23 45 -22 Sep 2007 Miliband 25 63 -38 Dec 2014 Corbyn 17 72 -55 Feb 2019 Either it's a blip, or Starmer's toast.
The only saving grace for Starmer is that the last 14 months the polls have been largely driven by the pandemic.
If this is the norm for the post pandemic phase then he's like a stepmom on Pornhub.
The only question is does the PLP have the desire to remove him?
I keep coming back to the question, that nobody's really answered - who would you replace him with?
Major Dan Jarvis.
Well quite. Personable, sane, doesn't keep banging on about Palestine. But does he want the job? All the signs I've seen are that he doesn't.
I've never heard Dan Jarvis speak, or what he really is like. All I know is that he was in the armed forces and that is why many think he could be good for Labour. The image of an ex squaddie might play well with the public. Other than that I don't know.
He's not strictly speaking a squaddie. He was an officer. BUT, and it's quite a big but, no one really thinks like that when you're talking about a Para or a Marine. He was the former. Pretty hard core.
I've a Labour friend from Barnsley who has been banging on about Jarvis for what feels like years and years.
How's Jarvis going to get past the membership vote though? Surely he will be viewed with suspicion by the bien pensants of N London and Middling University Labour club?
I just looked ta his Wiki page. he looks far too electable to be elected to Labour Leader. Absolutely no chance.
The next leader absolutely must be a woman apparently.
Hope you're not somebody who manages to ridicule Labour (i) for never having a woman leader and (ii) for thinking they have to pick a woman leader.
Because some people do manage that, would you believe.
Its entirely possible and consistent to ridicule Labour for both. The Tories have had a woman leader elected who was a tremendous success who was elected because of her own merits, not because she was a woman.
Labour should not pick a leader just because she's female, but equally true to say there ought to have been plenty of good quality female MPs who could have become leader down the years.
My dad said Labour missed a chance with Barbara Castle.
No disrespect to your dad, but no. IMO, she would have been as electorally attractive as J Corbyn, even though she was, unlike Corbyn, very bright. Shirley Williams was a different matter, except she felt the need to defect. She was highly intelligent and charismatic. She would have given Mrs T a run for her money.
Barbara Castle was very popular in the second half of the 1960s and a credible possible successor to Wilson had he met his demise at the time.
The first political comment I remember hearing was my Mam telling Dad "They should have had Red Barbara!"
Was this before or after "In Place of Strife"?
Which was quite controversial politically within the Labour Party, and rather dented Barbara Castle's career? Even if it was (or may well have been) the right . . . err . . . correct way to go?
If Place of Strife had been implemented, would Thatcher have had such an argument against Trade Unionism?
It's interesting that when people in America, France, German or wherever speak of "English" the generally mean "British". Though sometimes what we call British is really English.
Because the English are so quintessentially British?
The United States, France and Germany are all nations that have VERY strong regional identities that have been forged and fused into strong national identities, within one umbrella. In contrast to England which has been subsumed even more into the Britain MORE than Wales, Scotland or (most certainly!) Ireland.
English to British is somewhat like Prussian to German pre-WW2. But even more so.
I see Andy Burnham won in every single ward in all 10 boroughs of Greater Manchester, some of those wards are really not typical Labour heartlands by any stretch.
I heard that too. Is there a link anywhere? Some of them are true Blue Tory heartlands. Which probably have never voted Labour ever before.
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
I had a stunning Pouilly Fumé (Château de Tracy 2019) - in an online Wine Society cheese & wine tasting, paired beautifully with a Sainte Maure de Tourraine (not sure how it'd go with oysters!). The Wine Soc has sold out of it since the tasting. I highly recommend it; probably my favourite Sauv Blanc I've ever had, and worth every penny of the £23 it cost.
I think this is probably mostly evidence of the awesome power of auto-suggestion, but I got every flavour in this rather detailed set of tasting notes from the maker's website:
"Apparence : Pale yellow with bright green-tinged highlights Nose: Very intense. At first, fresh notes of blackcurrants, boxwood, peppermint and tarragon dominate. The nose then evolves towards fruitier notes of lemon followed by exotic fruit such as mango and passionfruit. Aromas of kiwi fruit are also revealed on a mineral and spicy background (coriander and green pepper) Palate: First impressions are full-bodied and supple with appetising notes of blackcurrant. The acidity then progressively rises, echoing the ripe, lemony flavours found on the nose. Flavours of exotic fruit and mango coulis bring it softness. The finish is long and structured and reveals notes of lime and grapefruit peel."
Cornish scholar A L Rowse on the English, accidentally describing our response to Covid, to a tee, about 60 years ago
“The English….are lazy, constitutionally indolent. They are always being caught lagging behind, unprepared – again and again in their history it has been the same; and then, when up against it – they more than make up for lost time by their resourcefulness, their inventiveness, their ability to extemporise, their self-reliance.”
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
This is where I struggle - as I said yesterday, there are many Englands - the bit of England in which I live is, I sense, very different from where some others on here reside.
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
I'll have a go, using Bill Buford, from Among the Thugs, his description of his years as an English football hooligan. He's in a stramash in Italy, fleeing down the road, and being chased by cops:
"Someone shouted that we were all English. Why are we running? The English don't run. And so it went on. Having fled in panic, some of the supporters would then remember that they were English and this was important, and they would remind the others that they too were English, and this was important, and with renewed sense of national identity, they would come abruptly to a halt, turn around, and charge the Italian police"
That, basically, is Brexit. We ran away for forty years then we remembered who we are.
That is us. A confused rabble, often uncouth, and yet, we finally turn and fight. And generally we win
I just read this book a couple of weeks ago, 30 years after it was published.
The Queens Speech was rather thin. This is not a great reforming government.
Most of the measures appear to be about centralising further control in Downing Street, - restrictions in rights to protest - restrictions on judicial review - a voter repression measure - centralisation of NHS control - centralisation of planning measures
And we know there’s no money, except for Defence and the NHS. Nowt on social care.
What happened to “levelling up”? What happened to “take back control?”
Smash them, smash them into the ground. No half measures, do it properly this time Netanyahu.
What do you think the Israelis have been trying to do ever since Sharon’s withdrawal under governments of all stripes?
Make Gaza uninhabitable, and the idea of a Palestinian nation is as dead as the proverbial dodo. That is why they cut off supplies of food, medicine and water purification equipment.
But they won’t ‘smash them into the ground’ as you rather disturbingly put it because that would stir up international sympathy and possibly international assistance for Gaza in the way a suffocating blockade simply doesn’t.
Equally, Hamas are clearly getting military supplies in still - and where they can get those, they don’t really have an excuse for not providing the people of Gaza with basic necessities. Similarly, while the Israeli rockets are killing children, that is because Hamas is careful to site their weponry near to vulnerable civilians - for example, their military council met on the floor above a nursery.
Anyone who tries to make heroes out of either side in the Holy Land is frankly deluding themselves.
The song quoted by @SandyRentool, "Man In the Corner Shop" is off a Jam album called "Sound Affects" that is a bit of a soundtrack to being Working Class in my opinion... in 1980! My favourite album of theirs and I think it stands the test of time
Far k'nell. As a very callow youth I went to see the Jam at Poplar Town Hall it could have been my first ever gig - 1977 I just googled. All I remember was an awful lot of working class folk with very short hair and Harringtons having a huge scrap on the platform of Poplar tube station and onesuch, in the midst of it all, running past me, pausing - was I going to get a smack? - realising I was very young, and running on to attack someone else.
Happy days!
Jesus. You and I are almost exactly the same vintage. My first "big" gig was Malvern Winter Gardens, the Jam. About 1977? Same tour?!
EXACTLY ONE WEEK AFTER!
Ha!
Eton Rifles is one of my favourite songs from the late 70s.
Obviously you are right to say that defining a nationality is inherently difficult. My problem is that I get the feeling that you think it’s peculiar to England. It isn’t.
What I would say is that the extent to which regional identities are strong varies dramatically across England. I’ll be honest, I don’t have a regional identity despite living in Woking almost of my life. By contrast, the Merseyside identity is very strong.
I'm sure it's not and from what small amount of travelling I've done, it's the same almost everywhere.
I agree completely about regional identities - in some areas very strong, in others much less so. In Switzerland, the German, French and Italian speaking areas are very different from each other as an example,
@NickPalmer might think differently but I always thought there was a strong Sonderjysk identity and the Fynboer always considered themselves different as did those from Lolland and Falster.
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
This is where I struggle - as I said yesterday, there are many Englands - the bit of England in which I live is, I sense, very different from where some others on here reside.
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
I'll have a go, using Bill Buford, from Among the Thugs, his description of his years as an English football hooligan. He's in a stramash in Italy, fleeing down the road, and being chased by cops:
"Someone shouted that we were all English. Why are we running? The English don't run. And so it went on. Having fled in panic, some of the supporters would then remember that they were English and this was important, and they would remind the others that they too were English, and this was important, and with renewed sense of national identity, they would come abruptly to a halt, turn around, and charge the Italian police"
That, basically, is Brexit. We ran away for forty years then we remembered who we are.
That is us. A confused rabble, often uncouth, and yet, we finally turn and fight. And generally we win
I just read this book a couple of weeks ago, 30 years after it was published.
The song quoted by @SandyRentool, "Man In the Corner Shop" is off a Jam album called "Sound Affects" that is a bit of a soundtrack to being Working Class in my opinion... in 1980! My favourite album of theirs and I think it stands the test of time
Far k'nell. As a very callow youth I went to see the Jam at Poplar Town Hall it could have been my first ever gig - 1977 I just googled. All I remember was an awful lot of working class folk with very short hair and Harringtons having a huge scrap on the platform of Poplar tube station and onesuch, in the midst of it all, running past me, pausing - was I going to get a smack? - realising I was very young, and running on to attack someone else.
Happy days!
Jesus. You and I are almost exactly the same vintage. My first "big" gig was Malvern Winter Gardens, the Jam. About 1977? Same tour?!
EXACTLY ONE WEEK AFTER!
Ha!
Eton Rifles is one of my favourite songs from the late 70s.
The Queens Speech was rather thin. This is not a great reforming government.
Most of the measures appear to be about centralising further control in Downing Street, - restrictions in rights to protest - restrictions on judicial review - a voter repression measure - centralisation of NHS control - centralisation of planning measures
And we know there’s no money, except for Defence and the NHS. Nowt on social care.
What happened to “levelling up”? What happened to “take back control?”
Well, the occupant of Number Ten is taking back control to himself, which was largely the point, wasn't it?
If you have a double barrelled name and you remember there only being four tv channels you are upper class, if you have one and you dont, you are working class!
Smash them, smash them into the ground. No half measures, do it properly this time Netanyahu.
That won't work.
Neither have the alternatives.
The two groups are never going to disappear from the area, and cannot eradicate each other. Better agreement sooner and fewer deaths.
I can't see there being peace - much as I would love for both sides to be able to
Unfortunately it has got to pretty much the stage where neither side will accept less than the whole. Positions are too entrenched, and both sides talk only to themselves and deliberately past each other. The Israelis see no reason to give up what they hold which suits them rather nicely, and with Gaza out of the way an annexation of the West Bank could be done comparatively easily. Meanwhile Hamas are adamant that the Arabs should hold all of Palestine, and for some strange reason the stranglehold Israel have put over them in Gaza isn’t changing their mind or softening their attitude.
There is a book on this, called ‘The Two State Delusion’ by Padruig O’Malley that goes into this in some depth and is well worth reading.
The Queens Speech was rather thin. This is not a great reforming government.
Most of the measures appear to be about centralising further control in Downing Street, - restrictions in rights to protest - restrictions on judicial review - a voter repression measure - centralisation of NHS control - centralisation of planning measures
And we know there’s no money, except for Defence and the NHS. Nowt on social care.
What happened to “levelling up”? What happened to “take back control?”
The Queens Speech was rather thin. This is not a great reforming government.
Most of the measures appear to be about centralising further control in Downing Street, - restrictions in rights to protest - restrictions on judicial review - a voter repression measure - centralisation of NHS control - centralisation of planning measures
And we know there’s no money, except for Defence and the NHS. Nowt on social care.
What happened to “levelling up”? What happened to “take back control?”
Well, the occupant of Number Ten is taking back control to himself, which was largely the point, wasn't it?
Indeed. It’s also scary. It’s not as if Boris, or this government, is very competent.
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
I had a stunning Pouilly Fumé (Château de Tracy 2019) - in an online Wine Society cheese & wine tasting, paired beautifully with a Sainte Maure de Tourraine (not sure how it'd go with oysters!). The Wine Soc has sold out of it since the tasting. I highly recommend it; probably my favourite Sauv Blanc I've ever had, and worth every penny of the £23 it cost.
I think this is probably mostly evidence of the awesome power of auto-suggestion, but I got every flavour in this rather detailed set of tasting notes from the maker's website:
"Apparence : Pale yellow with bright green-tinged highlights Nose: Very intense. At first, fresh notes of blackcurrants, boxwood, peppermint and tarragon dominate. The nose then evolves towards fruitier notes of lemon followed by exotic fruit such as mango and passionfruit. Aromas of kiwi fruit are also revealed on a mineral and spicy background (coriander and green pepper) Palate: First impressions are full-bodied and supple with appetising notes of blackcurrant. The acidity then progressively rises, echoing the ripe, lemony flavours found on the nose. Flavours of exotic fruit and mango coulis bring it softness. The finish is long and structured and reveals notes of lime and grapefruit peel."
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
I had a stunning Pouilly Fumé (Château de Tracy 2019) - in an online Wine Society cheese & wine tasting, paired beautifully with a Sainte Maure de Tourraine (not sure how it'd go with oysters!). The Wine Soc has sold out of it since the tasting. I highly recommend it; probably my favourite Sauv Blanc I've ever had, and worth every penny of the £23 it cost.
I think this is probably mostly evidence of the awesome power of auto-suggestion, but I got every flavour in this rather detailed set of tasting notes from the maker's website:
"Apparence : Pale yellow with bright green-tinged highlights Nose: Very intense. At first, fresh notes of blackcurrants, boxwood, peppermint and tarragon dominate. The nose then evolves towards fruitier notes of lemon followed by exotic fruit such as mango and passionfruit. Aromas of kiwi fruit are also revealed on a mineral and spicy background (coriander and green pepper) Palate: First impressions are full-bodied and supple with appetising notes of blackcurrant. The acidity then progressively rises, echoing the ripe, lemony flavours found on the nose. Flavours of exotic fruit and mango coulis bring it softness. The finish is long and structured and reveals notes of lime and grapefruit peel."
Smash them, smash them into the ground. No half measures, do it properly this time Netanyahu.
That won't work.
Neither have the alternatives.
The two groups are never going to disappear from the area, and cannot eradicate each other. Better agreement sooner and fewer deaths.
I can't see there being peace - much as I would love for both sides to be able to
Unfortunately it has got to pretty much the stage where neither side will accept less than the whole. Positions are too entrenched, and both sides talk only to themselves and deliberately past each other. The Israelis see no reason to give up what they hold which suits them rather nicely, and with Gaza out of the way an annexation of the West Bank could be done comparatively easily. Meanwhile Hamas are adamant that the Arabs should hold all of Palestine, and for some strange reason the stranglehold Israel have put over them in Gaza isn’t changing their mind or softening their attitude.
There is a book on this, called ‘The Two State Delusion’ by Padruig O’Malley that goes into this in some depth and is well worth reading.
The “Two State Delusion” could be about the Anglo-Scottish Union.
Smash them, smash them into the ground. No half measures, do it properly this time Netanyahu.
That won't work.
Neither have the alternatives.
The two groups are never going to disappear from the area, and cannot eradicate each other. Better agreement sooner and fewer deaths.
I can't see there being peace - much as I would love for both sides to be able to
Unfortunately it has got to pretty much the stage where neither side will accept less than the whole. Positions are too entrenched, and both sides talk only to themselves and deliberately past each other. The Israelis see no reason to give up what they hold which suits them rather nicely, and with Gaza out of the way an annexation of the West Bank could be done comparatively easily. Meanwhile Hamas are adamant that the Arabs should hold all of Palestine, and for some strange reason the stranglehold Israel have put over them in Gaza isn’t changing their mind or softening their attitude.
There is a book on this, called ‘The Two State Delusion’ by Padruig O’Malley that goes into this in some depth and is well worth reading.
Years ago when Harry's place was up and running they showed excerpts from KIDS tv shows in Gaza - a whole generation indoctrinated to hate and want to kill
Smash them, smash them into the ground. No half measures, do it properly this time Netanyahu.
That won't work.
Neither have the alternatives.
The two groups are never going to disappear from the area, and cannot eradicate each other. Better agreement sooner and fewer deaths.
I can't see there being peace - much as I would love for both sides to be able to
Unfortunately it has got to pretty much the stage where neither side will accept less than the whole. Positions are too entrenched, and both sides talk only to themselves and deliberately past each other. The Israelis see no reason to give up what they hold which suits them rather nicely, and with Gaza out of the way an annexation of the West Bank could be done comparatively easily. Meanwhile Hamas are adamant that the Arabs should hold all of Palestine, and for some strange reason the stranglehold Israel have put over them in Gaza isn’t changing their mind or softening their attitude.
There is a book on this, called ‘The Two State Delusion’ by Padruig O’Malley that goes into this in some depth and is well worth reading.
The “Two State Delusion” could be about the Anglo-Scottish Union.
The song quoted by @SandyRentool, "Man In the Corner Shop" is off a Jam album called "Sound Affects" that is a bit of a soundtrack to being Working Class in my opinion... in 1980! My favourite album of theirs and I think it stands the test of time
Far k'nell. As a very callow youth I went to see the Jam at Poplar Town Hall it could have been my first ever gig - 1977 I just googled. All I remember was an awful lot of working class folk with very short hair and Harringtons having a huge scrap on the platform of Poplar tube station and onesuch, in the midst of it all, running past me, pausing - was I going to get a smack? - realising I was very young, and running on to attack someone else.
Happy days!
Jesus. You and I are almost exactly the same vintage. My first "big" gig was Malvern Winter Gardens, the Jam. About 1977? Same tour?!
EXACTLY ONE WEEK AFTER!
Ha!
My first gig was Neil Diamond at Woburn in c1980 is and also in that era Mott the Hoople at the Odeon Hammersmith.
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
I had a stunning Pouilly Fumé (Château de Tracy 2019) - in an online Wine Society cheese & wine tasting, paired beautifully with a Sainte Maure de Tourraine (not sure how it'd go with oysters!). The Wine Soc has sold out of it since the tasting. I highly recommend it; probably my favourite Sauv Blanc I've ever had, and worth every penny of the £23 it cost.
I think this is probably mostly evidence of the awesome power of auto-suggestion, but I got every flavour in this rather detailed set of tasting notes from the maker's website:
"Apparence : Pale yellow with bright green-tinged highlights Nose: Very intense. At first, fresh notes of blackcurrants, boxwood, peppermint and tarragon dominate. The nose then evolves towards fruitier notes of lemon followed by exotic fruit such as mango and passionfruit. Aromas of kiwi fruit are also revealed on a mineral and spicy background (coriander and green pepper) Palate: First impressions are full-bodied and supple with appetising notes of blackcurrant. The acidity then progressively rises, echoing the ripe, lemony flavours found on the nose. Flavours of exotic fruit and mango coulis bring it softness. The finish is long and structured and reveals notes of lime and grapefruit peel."
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
I had a stunning Pouilly Fumé (Château de Tracy 2019) - in an online Wine Society cheese & wine tasting, paired beautifully with a Sainte Maure de Tourraine (not sure how it'd go with oysters!). The Wine Soc has sold out of it since the tasting. I highly recommend it; probably my favourite Sauv Blanc I've ever had, and worth every penny of the £23 it cost.
I think this is probably mostly evidence of the awesome power of auto-suggestion, but I got every flavour in this rather detailed set of tasting notes from the maker's website:
"Apparence : Pale yellow with bright green-tinged highlights Nose: Very intense. At first, fresh notes of blackcurrants, boxwood, peppermint and tarragon dominate. The nose then evolves towards fruitier notes of lemon followed by exotic fruit such as mango and passionfruit. Aromas of kiwi fruit are also revealed on a mineral and spicy background (coriander and green pepper) Palate: First impressions are full-bodied and supple with appetising notes of blackcurrant. The acidity then progressively rises, echoing the ripe, lemony flavours found on the nose. Flavours of exotic fruit and mango coulis bring it softness. The finish is long and structured and reveals notes of lime and grapefruit peel."
Smash them, smash them into the ground. No half measures, do it properly this time Netanyahu.
That won't work.
Neither have the alternatives.
The two groups are never going to disappear from the area, and cannot eradicate each other. Better agreement sooner and fewer deaths.
I can't see there being peace - much as I would love for both sides to be able to
Unfortunately it has got to pretty much the stage where neither side will accept less than the whole. Positions are too entrenched, and both sides talk only to themselves and deliberately past each other. The Israelis see no reason to give up what they hold which suits them rather nicely, and with Gaza out of the way an annexation of the West Bank could be done comparatively easily. Meanwhile Hamas are adamant that the Arabs should hold all of Palestine, and for some strange reason the stranglehold Israel have put over them in Gaza isn’t changing their mind or softening their attitude.
There is a book on this, called ‘The Two State Delusion’ by Padruig O’Malley that goes into this in some depth and is well worth reading.
Years ago when Harry's place was up and running they showed excerpts from KIDS tv shows in Gaza - a whole generation indoctrinated to hate and want to kill
There is a whole chapter in that book on how both sides establish ‘narratives’ about the other.
You would find equally disturbing items in the educational programme for IDF conscripts. The whole programme is geared to developing a siege mentality - ‘we’re alone against the world, and if we don’t fight like tigers we’ll all be killed.’ It’s no coincidence much of it happens at Yad Vashem.
Incidentally I got the first real feelings of a return to normality today - nothing major, it's still tough out there, still cruel, still hard, still deadly, and the new normality is austere, impoverished, challenging, but I definitely did feel better as I downed an entire bottle of Sancerre with a huge plate of fruits de mer with a friend outside Bibendum on the Fulham Road, in the warm spring sun
I had a stunning Pouilly Fumé (Château de Tracy 2019) - in an online Wine Society cheese & wine tasting, paired beautifully with a Sainte Maure de Tourraine (not sure how it'd go with oysters!). The Wine Soc has sold out of it since the tasting. I highly recommend it; probably my favourite Sauv Blanc I've ever had, and worth every penny of the £23 it cost.
I think this is probably mostly evidence of the awesome power of auto-suggestion, but I got every flavour in this rather detailed set of tasting notes from the maker's website:
"Apparence : Pale yellow with bright green-tinged highlights Nose: Very intense. At first, fresh notes of blackcurrants, boxwood, peppermint and tarragon dominate. The nose then evolves towards fruitier notes of lemon followed by exotic fruit such as mango and passionfruit. Aromas of kiwi fruit are also revealed on a mineral and spicy background (coriander and green pepper) Palate: First impressions are full-bodied and supple with appetising notes of blackcurrant. The acidity then progressively rises, echoing the ripe, lemony flavours found on the nose. Flavours of exotic fruit and mango coulis bring it softness. The finish is long and structured and reveals notes of lime and grapefruit peel."
I thought you might be! But then noticed that the actually winery's link that I'd posted had sold out too, so thought I best give a useful link to my recommendation
Israel can handle this assault pretty easily. it looks like
But one day a larger Islamic regime will buy missiles that Israel cannot resist, and will use them, possibly armed with nukes. And America the great Protector will no longer be the global superpower, ready to intervene. It will be China. And China doesn't give a fuck about Jews, China just wants money, power and obeisance
Israel is playing a very dangerous game, in the long term. Tho I accept that making peace with the Palestinians is fiendishly hard, too many on the "Palestinian" side have no interest in peace, at all
I think those are values - with some policies - but I'm not sure they are the basis for a common identity.
I think it starts with identifying with the land, and sense of place, together with the people that live there.
This is where I struggle - as I said yesterday, there are many Englands - the bit of England in which I live is, I sense, very different from where some others on here reside.
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
Yes, of course, but it all lies within the same geography - that's what I mean by land.
The reason England "works" and still exists as a state is because you and I, Leon, Gallowgate, Philip, David Herdson, Richard Tyndall, TSE, Bunnco, Nigel etc. all identify as having something in common within a defined geography. We have choices as to what we emphasise in that - and some are uncomfortable specifying anything at all - but there need to be sufficient similarities for that to hold true.
If it did not hold true, England would have already split up into, say, Wessex, Cornwall, Northumbria and Mercia or other successor states. Alternatively, it might have been wholly absorbed upwards into a transcontinental state.
I see this as axiomatic otherwise you could simply come up with a list of values and say anyone who subscribes to it anywhere in the world would be "English", and I think that fundamentally misconstrues what nationality is; you'd be describing a club or society, not a nationality.
The Queens Speech was rather thin. This is not a great reforming government.
Most of the measures appear to be about centralising further control in Downing Street, - restrictions in rights to protest - restrictions on judicial review - a voter repression measure - centralisation of NHS control - centralisation of planning measures
And we know there’s no money, except for Defence and the NHS. Nowt on social care.
What happened to “levelling up”? What happened to “take back control?”
The Queens Speech was rather thin. This is not a great reforming government.
Most of the measures appear to be about centralising further control in Downing Street, - restrictions in rights to protest - restrictions on judicial review - a voter repression measure - centralisation of NHS control - centralisation of planning measures
And we know there’s no money, except for Defence and the NHS. Nowt on social care.
What happened to “levelling up”? What happened to “take back control?”
Well, the occupant of Number Ten is taking back control to himself, which was largely the point, wasn't it?
Indeed. It’s also scary. It’s not as if Boris, or this government, is very competent.
Oh no. Johnson is very competent at what matters to him, which is being popular and doing down the other lot. Running the Her Majesty's Government well in the interests of Her Majesty's subjects? Meh. That's more of a "nice to have".
Obviously you are right to say that defining a nationality is inherently difficult. My problem is that I get the feeling that you think it’s peculiar to England. It isn’t.
What I would say is that the extent to which regional identities are strong varies dramatically across England. I’ll be honest, I don’t have a regional identity despite living in Woking almost of my life. By contrast, the Merseyside identity is very strong.
I'm sure it's not and from what small amount of travelling I've done, it's the same almost everywhere.
I agree completely about regional identities - in some areas very strong, in others much less so. In Switzerland, the German, French and Italian speaking areas are very different from each other as an example,
@NickPalmer might think differently but I always thought there was a strong Sonderjysk identity and the Fynboer always considered themselves different as did those from Lolland and Falster.
Yes, identities can be multilayered and complimentary.
On recalling Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom (registered voters)
by Party > Total Reg Yes 36% No 49% Undecided 15% (change since Jan 2021 Yes 0% No +4% Und -4%) > Democrats Yes 8% No 75% Undecided 17% > Republicans Yes 85% No 8% Undecided 7% > No Party Yes 33% No 45% Undecided 22%
by Age Group > all are net negative on recalling Newsom > highest percent Yes are age 50-64 at 38% Yes 51% No 11% undecided > highest percent No are age 65+ at 36% Yes 58% No 8% undecided > undecideds higher among younger age groups
by Geographic region > North Coast/Sierras highest Yes at 52% Yes No 39% undecided 9% > Net in favor of recall: Central Valley, Inland Empire (southeast CA) > Net tie on recall: Orange County at 45% Yes 45% No 10% undecided > Net against recall: Los Angeles County, San Diego County, Central Coast > San Francisco Bay Area highest No at 25% Yes 65% No 15% undecided
UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Affairs / Los Angeles Times On-line survey of 10,210 CA registered voters April 29 - May 5, moe plus/minus 2%
Comments
Ok so I ask you again - tell me a couple you'd like to see.
But that's a guess.
In Place of Strife was the way to go.
Unfortunately it put in place strife.
It's like trying to listen to the complete Alistair Cooke.
US has Congress & separation of powers in order to NOT have an all or mostly powerful Parliament. But we embraced - indeed demanded - representative government right from the get-go.
For which we have you to thank!
And still do, even after Donald Trump's attempt to copy Oliver Cromwell.
All forms of patriotism start with identifying with the land. That gives a country its boundaries and borders and is how it starts.
That doesn't preclude immigration of course or its character changing but those immigrants in turn, over time, will also identify with the land.
I think some people confuse this with exclusive "blood and soil" stuff, which it definitely isn't.
https://twitter.com/gaza_report/status/1392179722747097091
https://fr.sputniknews.com/france/202105111045580196-les-limites-de-la-transparence-lelysee-refuse-de-devoiler-les-fiches-de-paie-de-macron/
Are you saying there wasn't a pan-Jewish patriotism that predated the State of Israel?
Let me try making the argument another way: there has to be a geography or boundary. Otherwise you could simply, as Nick Palmer says, tick off exactly the same policies and values in Denmark and they would also be "English".
There has to be a sense of place. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.
https://radicalmanchester.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/paul-rose-and-the-campaign-for-democracy-in-ulster/
https://twitter.com/theragex/status/1392181180498423809
Excellent Jersey oysters, @kinabalu, excellent
Fair conclusion?
There's an old adage - "people like people like themselves". We gravitate toward people and places and lifestyles and relationships which work for us. All too often, we want to be with people who think like we do, act like we do and are how we are because we recognise and understand that.
I suppose "my" England isn't anyone else's England but that doesn't matter. No one has a monopoly on the definition of what it is to be English. To try, as some do, to distil it or refine it or reduce it is futile - it defies and should defy such actions.
Certainly, no political party or movement can claim to be the mouthpiece of the English - it's absurd.
It is the variety, diversity and difference in which our greater commonality resides - the whole is the sum of the parts, both positive and negative.
Perhaps that is as near as I can get to defining what it is to be English.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_English-speaking_population
Ha!
What I would say is that the extent to which regional identities are strong varies dramatically across England. I’ll be honest, I don’t have a regional identity despite living in Woking almost of my life. By contrast, the Merseyside identity is very strong.
I'd say Englishness, or Britishness, is more noticeable when you see something that isn't it. The Batley Grammar School incident, for example. Because here, religion doesn't justify trading other norms like freedom of speech. That's not solely true of Britain, but it is far from universal in the world.
Which brings us to the interesting concept of denial of things people don't want to be true. There is a True Faith of the Anti-Anti-Ballistic-Missile church - people who believe that you can never stop ballistic weapons. Hilariously, they have tried to claim that Iron Dome (limited though it is) can't work, actually misses everything, or costs 10 trillion dollars. Often all of the above.
This is because they are ideologically opposed to anti-ballistic weapons.
The mental processes involved are fascinating.
I once watched as someone created a whole new denial in response to a scientific fact we were discussing. I wish I could have videoed it.
"Someone shouted that we were all English. Why are we running? The English don't run. And so it went on. Having fled in panic, some of the supporters would then remember that they were English and this was important, and they would remind the others that they too were English, and this was important, and with renewed sense of national identity, they would come abruptly to a halt, turn around, and charge the Italian police"
That, basically, is Brexit. We ran away for forty years then we remembered who we are.
That is us. A confused rabble, often uncouth, and yet, we finally turn and fight. And generally we win
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/may/11/bob-baffert-medina-spirit-kentucky-derby-drugs-test-steroid
Because the English are so quintessentially British?
The United States, France and Germany are all nations that have VERY strong regional identities that have been forged and fused into strong national identities, within one umbrella. In contrast to England which has been subsumed even more into the Britain MORE than Wales, Scotland or (most certainly!) Ireland.
English to British is somewhat like Prussian to German pre-WW2. But even more so.
I think this is probably mostly evidence of the awesome power of auto-suggestion, but I got every flavour in this rather detailed set of tasting notes from the maker's website:
"Apparence : Pale yellow with bright green-tinged highlights
Nose: Very intense. At first, fresh notes of blackcurrants, boxwood, peppermint and tarragon dominate.
The nose then evolves towards fruitier notes of lemon followed by exotic fruit such as mango and passionfruit.
Aromas of kiwi fruit are also revealed on a mineral and spicy background (coriander and green pepper)
Palate: First impressions are full-bodied and supple with appetising notes of blackcurrant.
The acidity then progressively rises, echoing the ripe, lemony flavours found on the nose.
Flavours of exotic fruit and mango coulis bring it softness. The finish is long and structured and reveals notes of lime and grapefruit peel."
https://www.chateau-de-tracy.com/en/our-wines/blanc-fume-125440.html
https://www.lafromagerie.co.uk/sainte-maure-de-touraine
“The English….are lazy, constitutionally indolent. They are always being caught lagging behind, unprepared – again and again in their history it has been the same; and then, when up against it – they more than make up for lost time by their resourcefulness, their inventiveness, their ability to extemporise, their self-reliance.”
This is not a great reforming government.
Most of the measures appear to be about centralising further control in Downing Street,
- restrictions in rights to protest
- restrictions on judicial review
- a voter repression measure
- centralisation of NHS control
- centralisation of planning measures
And we know there’s no money, except for Defence and the NHS. Nowt on social care.
What happened to “levelling up”?
What happened to “take back control?”
Make Gaza uninhabitable, and the idea of a Palestinian nation is as dead as the proverbial dodo. That is why they cut off supplies of food, medicine and water purification equipment.
But they won’t ‘smash them into the ground’ as you rather disturbingly put it because that would stir up international sympathy and possibly international assistance for Gaza in the way a suffocating blockade simply doesn’t.
Equally, Hamas are clearly getting military supplies in still - and where they can get those, they don’t really have an excuse for not providing the people of Gaza with basic necessities. Similarly, while the Israeli rockets are killing children, that is because Hamas is careful to site their weponry near to vulnerable civilians - for example, their military council met on the floor above a nursery.
Anyone who tries to make heroes out of either side in the Holy Land is frankly deluding themselves.
I agree completely about regional identities - in some areas very strong, in others much less so. In Switzerland, the German, French and Italian speaking areas are very different from each other as an example,
@NickPalmer might think differently but I always thought there was a strong Sonderjysk identity and the Fynboer always considered themselves different as did those from Lolland and Falster.
it's a repost of a brilliant USENET post from soc.history.what-if
There is a book on this, called ‘The Two State Delusion’ by Padruig O’Malley that goes into this in some depth and is well worth reading.
https://twitter.com/ELINTNews/status/1392183158293028865
Then a rocket hit just down the street - Incredible views
It’s also scary. It’s not as if Boris, or this government, is very competent.
https://www.tanners-wines.co.uk/pouilly-fume-chateau-de-tracy-2019
You would find equally disturbing items in the educational programme for IDF conscripts. The whole programme is geared to developing a siege mentality - ‘we’re alone against the world, and if we don’t fight like tigers we’ll all be killed.’ It’s no coincidence much of it happens at Yad Vashem.
Reserves called up and navy deploying offshore
Netanyahu addressing nation in about 10 mins
Perhaps if he hadn’t been trying to steal yet more land in the West Bank to enrich his mates this wouldn’t have flared up in the first place...
But one day a larger Islamic regime will buy missiles that Israel cannot resist, and will use them, possibly armed with nukes. And America the great Protector will no longer be the global superpower, ready to intervene. It will be China. And China doesn't give a fuck about Jews, China just wants money, power and obeisance
Israel is playing a very dangerous game, in the long term. Tho I accept that making peace with the Palestinians is fiendishly hard, too many on the "Palestinian" side have no interest in peace, at all
The reason England "works" and still exists as a state is because you and I, Leon, Gallowgate, Philip, David Herdson, Richard Tyndall, TSE, Bunnco, Nigel etc. all identify as having something in common within a defined geography. We have choices as to what we emphasise in that - and some are uncomfortable specifying anything at all - but there need to be sufficient similarities for that to hold true.
If it did not hold true, England would have already split up into, say, Wessex, Cornwall, Northumbria and Mercia or other successor states. Alternatively, it might have been wholly absorbed upwards into a transcontinental state.
I see this as axiomatic otherwise you could simply come up with a list of values and say anyone who subscribes to it anywhere in the world would be "English", and I think that fundamentally misconstrues what nationality is; you'd be describing a club or society, not a nationality.
It looks like far more than a weekend dip, and across so many countries.
Running the Her Majesty's Government well in the interests of Her Majesty's subjects? Meh. That's more of a "nice to have".
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1m66w3d9
On recalling Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom (registered voters)
by Party
> Total Reg Yes 36% No 49% Undecided 15% (change since Jan 2021 Yes 0% No +4% Und -4%)
> Democrats Yes 8% No 75% Undecided 17%
> Republicans Yes 85% No 8% Undecided 7%
> No Party Yes 33% No 45% Undecided 22%
by Age Group
> all are net negative on recalling Newsom
> highest percent Yes are age 50-64 at 38% Yes 51% No 11% undecided
> highest percent No are age 65+ at 36% Yes 58% No 8% undecided
> undecideds higher among younger age groups
by Geographic region
> North Coast/Sierras highest Yes at 52% Yes No 39% undecided 9%
> Net in favor of recall: Central Valley, Inland Empire (southeast CA)
> Net tie on recall: Orange County at 45% Yes 45% No 10% undecided
> Net against recall: Los Angeles County, San Diego County, Central Coast
> San Francisco Bay Area highest No at 25% Yes 65% No 15% undecided
UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Affairs / Los Angeles Times
On-line survey of 10,210 CA registered voters April 29 - May 5, moe plus/minus 2%
Don't talk nonsense
Many have predicted the failure of HS2 since right back in 2008, 13 years on it continues to progress.
The Russians might be a different matter.