Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

YouGov/Times “Blue Wall” poll finds six point CON to LAB swing since GE2019 – politicalbetting.com

124678

Comments

  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,150
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Aren't they just saying that along with the bad stuff the Aztecs made some important and positive contributions to the development of human civilization?

    In which case - if I'm right to assume they are saying that, and they are right, or at least arguably right, to say it - it's not really like calling Hitler a valuable early car designer.
    It is interesting to view the err... continuity of certain economic policies that the Fascists espoused. Which is not entirely surprising really, since the economic advisers the Fascists used didn't retire to monasteries in 1945. Where they ended up is both interesting and surprising. Or not, really.

    Should we then say that Hitler and Mussolini were valuable economic thinkers? If not, why not?
    Can we de-enigmatize please, Malmsers old bean. Lift the shroud as it were.

    What significant macro-economic policy innovations did Hitler introduce that we still gain value from today?

    You tell me what they are and then we can assess whether he deserves a title of "valuable economic thinker".
    You need an economist for much of it. But some of the modern games that central banks play with the economy relate to Schacht's innovations. Given that the Nazi's tore up the old rule books and wanted the "new", it is not surprising that that is what they got.

    On the industrial side the recent Biden/Intel strategic on shoring is exactly the kind of thing that the er... Corporatists wanted.
    So what's your conclusion from this? - that Hitler WAS a valuable economic thinker? Or at least that a case can be made?

    It's not an opinion I've come across but that doesn't by itself mean it's crazy.
    I think the point is that even having the discussion is verboten.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    edited July 2021
    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,294
    alex_ said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Alistair said:

    Chart's gone negative. Negative is good

    give it another few weeks following the start of the SPL, PL and EFL.
    I think some people misrepresent the football spike. It’s was not likely caused by tens of thousands in a football stadium. It was the millions in homes and pubs. “Normal” football will never have the same impact.

    That’s of course not to say there won’t be case growth as it gets colder and wetter (if the latter were possible). But not because of football.
    Indeed. I guess fans packing into tube trains might add to the spread but that will soon die out given it’s mostly the same fans every other week.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Aren't they just saying that along with the bad stuff the Aztecs made some important and positive contributions to the development of human civilization?

    In which case - if I'm right to assume they are saying that, and they are right, or at least arguably right, to say it - it's not really like calling Hitler a valuable early car designer.
    They didn't get the chance because their culture was obliterated. We don't know what they thought about anything, except placating the sun god.
    Although we do seem to know they reveled in torture and killing. Not a hot topic of mine tbf - little is - but that looks to be about the size of it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    alex_ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Aren't they just saying that along with the bad stuff the Aztecs made some important and positive contributions to the development of human civilization?

    In which case - if I'm right to assume they are saying that, and they are right, or at least arguably right, to say it - it's not really like calling Hitler a valuable early car designer.
    It is interesting to view the err... continuity of certain economic policies that the Fascists espoused. Which is not entirely surprising really, since the economic advisers the Fascists used didn't retire to monasteries in 1945. Where they ended up is both interesting and surprising. Or not, really.

    Should we then say that Hitler and Mussolini were valuable economic thinkers? If not, why not?
    Can we de-enigmatize please, Malmsers old bean. Lift the shroud as it were.

    What significant macro-economic policy innovations did Hitler introduce that we still gain value from today?

    You tell me what they are and then we can assess whether he deserves a title of "valuable economic thinker".
    You need an economist for much of it. But some of the modern games that central banks play with the economy relate to Schacht's innovations. Given that the Nazi's tore up the old rule books and wanted the "new", it is not surprising that that is what they got.

    On the industrial side the recent Biden/Intel strategic on shoring is exactly the kind of thing that the er... Corporatists wanted.
    So what's your conclusion from this? - that Hitler WAS a valuable economic thinker? Or at least that a case can be made?

    It's not an opinion I've come across but that doesn't by itself mean it's crazy.
    I think the point is that even having the discussion is verboten.
    Also a lot of it seemed to be about occupying and robbing the Czechs, Belgians, French, Poles, Russians, Baltic States, etc. etc.
  • Dirty Saffers.

    At least two red cards worth of dirtiness.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    ...

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    Greens will not be +7 in these seats in an actual GE when the government is being decided me thinks.

    The Corbynites retreat, I reckon they will do well
    The difficulty the Greens have is that there were only five seats where they were in double digits in 2019. They therefore struggle with the whole "we can win here" component that is so important in FPTP - how do you convince people that you're not a wasted vote?

    The LibDems achieved that by building local strength - using council elections as a springboard to Westminster success. Can the Greens do similar? Or will their votes end up being spent tactically?
    I think the Corbynite types vote with heart not head. The hate Sir Keir as much as Boris, so what does it matter?
    The Corbynite types tempted by the Greens hate the Tories much, much more than they hate Labour. It's not just about the leaders. So when push comes to shove in some seats they'll hold their nose and vote Labour: not for Starmer but against Tories. Just as quite a few Tories aren't keen on Boris but still vote Tory.
    That's right. Corbynites might well vote Green in safe seats, but can recognise a marginal when they see one, and they're much more anti-Tory ("evil") than anti-Starmer ("uninspiring"). Also, being restless against a Labour government is more fun.

    Cf. B&S, where the socialist green candidate made a serious effort, and didn't get very far.
    Where the real Green candidate didnt stand?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,150
    spudgfsh said:

    alex_ said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Alistair said:

    Chart's gone negative. Negative is good

    give it another few weeks following the start of the SPL, PL and EFL.
    I think some people misrepresent the football spike. It’s was not likely caused by tens of thousands in a football stadium. It was the millions in homes and pubs. “Normal” football will never have the same impact.

    That’s of course not to say there won’t be case growth as it gets colder and wetter (if the latter were possible). But not because of football.
    If there is another spike caused by league football it'll be because of fans in pubs (either before/after or watching on sky).
    Yes, but my point was that “fans in pubs” isn’t really something on anything like the same level. There are any number of comparable scenarios which will cause case rises (including most obviously, mass public transportation). Or just regular Friday/Saturday nights.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,294

    Dirty Saffers.

    At least two red cards worth of dirtiness.

    That Eben Etzebeth is a total dick.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    Greens will not be +7 in these seats in an actual GE when the government is being decided me thinks.

    The Corbynites retreat, I reckon they will do well
    The difficulty the Greens have is that there were only five seats where they were in double digits in 2019. They therefore struggle with the whole "we can win here" component that is so important in FPTP - how do you convince people that you're not a wasted vote?

    The LibDems achieved that by building local strength - using council elections as a springboard to Westminster success. Can the Greens do similar? Or will their votes end up being spent tactically?
    I think the Corbynite types vote with heart not head. The hate Sir Keir as much as Boris, so what does it matter?
    The Corbynite types tempted by the Greens hate the Tories much, much more than they hate Labour. It's not just about the leaders. So when push comes to shove in some seats they'll hold their nose and vote Labour: not for Starmer but against Tories. Just as quite a few Tories aren't keen on Boris but still vote Tory.
    That's right. Corbynites might well vote Green in safe seats, but can recognise a marginal when they see one, and they're much more anti-Tory ("evil") than anti-Starmer ("uninspiring"). Also, being restless against a Labour government is more fun.

    Cf. B&S, where the socialist green candidate made a serious effort, and didn't get very far.
    Think and hope you and Al are right on this, Nick. But there is quite some vitriol against Starmer on Left Digital. It certainly on the face of it appears to trump anti-Tory sentiment. But perhaps the latter kind of goes without saying, hence is less said.
  • Yellow card for that? Should be red.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,294
    It should be halftime now!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651
    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Point of order. The Fuehrer did not design the KdF-wagen. He was the facilitator, commissioner, etc. Herr Dr Porsche led the design team. Producer and director, if you like.
    Adolf Hitler similar to Boris Johnson (on the vaccine) then in this regard? Would that be fair?
  • tlg86 said:

    Dirty Saffers.

    At least two red cards worth of dirtiness.

    That Eben Etzebeth is a total dick.
    I wasn't that fussed by the Lions this year (no fans, Warren Gatland being a bell end) but the Saffers have wound me up so much, Etzebeth but most of Rassie Erasmus.

    Those two are the worst thing South Africa have produced and I'm including Apartheid and the vuvuzela.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    Cyclefree said:

    Carnyx said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Carnyx said:

    Cyclefree said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    DougSeal said:
    A computer that could smell someone ten miles away and identify which Olympic sized swimming pool has a drop of blood in it would be a remarkable machine. Dogs’ smell is somewhere between 1,000 and 10,000 times better than ours and it occupies between 30-40% of their brain capacity.
    And what does my dog do with this power? Spends as much time as possible sniffing where other dogs have done a wee...
    We did an introduction to scent training last weekend, and there is some more useful stuff you can do with your dog if you give it some time. For example it is relatively easy to train your dog to find stuff like your car keys, and the trainer’s dog is apparently well known for tracking down missing cats near where they live.
    Right. I know what I'm going to be doing this weekend - training the dog to find my reading glasses.
    What breed, might I inquire? Always interesting to see what breeds people pick ...
    A mixture of collie and NZ Huntaway. Came from a local farmer. His parents were working dogs. He tries to herd the cats. Has a wonderful sweet personality.
    How interesting - and presumably needing plenty of walkies and things to do.
    Yes - but here in the Lakes it's ideal for him. We have a huge garden, it's a quiet village so he wanders off to see his doggy friends and he loves swimming in the sea and racing round the beach. He goes running with my daughter.

    He's getting on a bit now. I've never had a dog before but am converted. Husband will be utterly distraught when he goes. He loves that dog more than me. (I answer back - 😁.)

    https://imgur.com/xsHjh5V

    Oh, that's lovely. I get the impression that crossbreeding can lighten the sometimes rather intense nature of the Border Collie - friends of ours had a collie cross (with whippet I think?) and he had a very similar temperament. Still miss taking him for walks. (My family had Irish Setters.)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    kinabalu said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Point of order. The Fuehrer did not design the KdF-wagen. He was the facilitator, commissioner, etc. Herr Dr Porsche led the design team. Producer and director, if you like.
    Adolf Hitler similar to Boris Johnson (on the vaccine) then in this regard? Would that be fair?
    *blinks in surprise*
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651
    alex_ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Aren't they just saying that along with the bad stuff the Aztecs made some important and positive contributions to the development of human civilization?

    In which case - if I'm right to assume they are saying that, and they are right, or at least arguably right, to say it - it's not really like calling Hitler a valuable early car designer.
    It is interesting to view the err... continuity of certain economic policies that the Fascists espoused. Which is not entirely surprising really, since the economic advisers the Fascists used didn't retire to monasteries in 1945. Where they ended up is both interesting and surprising. Or not, really.

    Should we then say that Hitler and Mussolini were valuable economic thinkers? If not, why not?
    Can we de-enigmatize please, Malmsers old bean. Lift the shroud as it were.

    What significant macro-economic policy innovations did Hitler introduce that we still gain value from today?

    You tell me what they are and then we can assess whether he deserves a title of "valuable economic thinker".
    You need an economist for much of it. But some of the modern games that central banks play with the economy relate to Schacht's innovations. Given that the Nazi's tore up the old rule books and wanted the "new", it is not surprising that that is what they got.

    On the industrial side the recent Biden/Intel strategic on shoring is exactly the kind of thing that the er... Corporatists wanted.
    So what's your conclusion from this? - that Hitler WAS a valuable economic thinker? Or at least that a case can be made?

    It's not an opinion I've come across but that doesn't by itself mean it's crazy.
    I think the point is that even having the discussion is verboten.
    The discussion flowed from the following comment by the fruity Leon.

    "Calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’."

    I took issue with this. Then Malmesbury got involved and ... well here we are.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 11,898
    edited July 2021
    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    kinabalu said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Point of order. The Fuehrer did not design the KdF-wagen. He was the facilitator, commissioner, etc. Herr Dr Porsche led the design team. Producer and director, if you like.
    Adolf Hitler similar to Boris Johnson (on the vaccine) then in this regard? Would that be fair?
    On second thoughts:

    The Fuehrer had a clear vision of a modern Germany with Autobahnen (also convenient for internal LOC for switching fronts). So, as well as an Organization Todt to build the aforesaid A-bahnen, the approved members of the German Volk needed a nice cheap(ish) car to be part of the Volk community and go out for approved Volkish outings. And a motor industry to stimulate to provide factories which could be used to motorise the Wehrmacht (as, indeed, happened to the Vokswagen factory when the lines were switched from KdF-Wagen to Kuebelwagen and Schwimmwagen for the war effort - hence, IIRC. the raised suspension later used on the VW Bus).

    You can draw your own comparison of Mr Johnson's clarity of overarching vision and consistency in pursuing his own aims.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,654
    I must admit , I didn't see Boris and Carrie having another baby and so soon...
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651
    Carnyx said:

    kinabalu said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Point of order. The Fuehrer did not design the KdF-wagen. He was the facilitator, commissioner, etc. Herr Dr Porsche led the design team. Producer and director, if you like.
    Adolf Hitler similar to Boris Johnson (on the vaccine) then in this regard? Would that be fair?
    *blinks in surprise*
    Godwin blown to smithereens! :smile:
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,798
    Florida reports 21,683 new coronavirus cases, the biggest one-day increase on record, and 108 new deaths
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.
    Ah, like the old Classical Studies.

    But that isn't the 'Latin' some people seem to imagine, and which I had - undiluted. The nearest I ever got to any alleviation of straight Latin and Greek (in the 1970s) was one lesson where the map of a Roman camp was drawn on the blackboard. Any outings were strictly extracurricular and free time.





  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,725
    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 1,616
    IshmaelZ said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    The Olympics needs a dramatic new sport

    I reckon it is time to reintroduce pok-ta-pok: the Mesomaerican ball game (of the Maya, Aztecs, etc)

    It is simple but quite compelling. Two teams of maybe four players each compete on a hard stone ball-court, not unlike a real tennis court. With bats, arms and hips they propel a large, firm rubber ball at each other and also at a stone hoop placed high to the side. Victory is achieved via points, or by slotting the ball through the hoop.

    it's not a game for the faint hearted, however. For example, the ball is genuinely hard, and can cause severe bruising, internal injuries - even death in extreme cases. Also, at the end of the game the entire losing team is ritually sacrificed by decapitation, and after that they also sacrifice and dismember the entire winning team. And then the next teams play, for a while, with the severed heads and hands.

    So it might not be quite in tune with the Woke agenda in British Olympics, but on the other hand the inquest into TeamGB's performance would be rendered largely pointless, thus saving money?

    Perhaps just a tad severe...

    Chariot racing and horse archery are both ancient disciplines ripe for revival. In a previous thread I also invented elephant javelin, but the provision of the necessary animals could prove somewhat challenging. Horse javelin could still be fantastic though.

    Also, jousting.
    Horse archery is allegedly possible because at the gallop horses have all 4 feet of the ground at one stage, giving you the still platform you need for archery. Elephants don't gallop, making javelin chucking problematic.
    Elephants can get up a fair turn of speed, but yes, horses would be more practical.

    My conception of the mounted javelin event (as distinct from how they would actually have been used by skirmishers in ancient warfare) is as follows: rider charges down a runway as fast as possible, utilising the momentum of the animal to help launch the projectile. The skill, rather as with traditional javelin, is to hurl the implement along an optimal trajectory and with as much force as possible, without crossing the line at the end of the track.

    Co-ordinating the chucking of the spear and controlling the animal ought to make for a challenge and a spectacle!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,725

    I must admit , I didn't see Boris and Carrie having another baby and so soon...

    Why? Did you have insider information to the contrary?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,252
    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    To which I would add. Where is the demand? Unless it is made compulsory not many will choose it at 14. Few continue French, Spanish, etc. when given the choice.
    All of the above are perfectly valid reasons why it isn't taught now.
    That the Tory Party is so ignorant of the basics of both supply and demand. A visitor from 2007 would be astonished.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,150
    Couple of interesting pieces re:America

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/31/covid-coronavirus-vaccination-us-media-white-house


    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/covid-vaccine-booster-shots-delta-variant-are-being-over-hyped-ncna1275507


    Separating the scientific base versus vested interest on boosters is going to be a tough one for Governments to manage
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
    PS But then some of the emperors and top class types were of varied skin colour too. IIRC English Heritage came a cropper with the DM tendency when they showed that happening at, I think, York, or Eboracum as one should properly say.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,607
    Useful from John Rentoul on the subject of how SKS's problems start rather than end when he tells us what Labour's policies actually are on anything real. Saying nothing at all quietens but doesn't solve either Labour's loony wing or its genuine centrist problems over FOM, rejoin, NI protocol.

    At some point SKS has to show he can solve his and the country's problems. I doubt if polls mean much until we have seen bit more of this. As there is a centre left majority it is his to take. It will be an interesting couple of years.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/keir-starmer-labour-conference-brighton-b1894373.html
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651
    Carnyx said:

    kinabalu said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Point of order. The Fuehrer did not design the KdF-wagen. He was the facilitator, commissioner, etc. Herr Dr Porsche led the design team. Producer and director, if you like.
    Adolf Hitler similar to Boris Johnson (on the vaccine) then in this regard? Would that be fair?
    On second thoughts:

    The Fuehrer had a clear vision of a modern Germany with Autobahnen (also convenient for internal LOC for switching fronts). So, as well as an Organization Todt to build the aforesaid A-bahnen, the approved members of the German Volk needed a nice cheap(ish) car to be part of the Volk community and go out for approved Volkish outings. And a motor industry to stimulate to provide factories which could be used to motorise the Wehrmacht (as, indeed, happened to the Vokswagen factory when the lines were switched from KdF-Wagen to Kuebelwagen and Schwimmwagen for the war effort - hence, IIRC. the raised suspension later used on the VW Bus).

    You can draw your own comparison of Mr Johnson's clarity of overarching vision and consistency in pursuing his own aims.
    Interesting. So I'd say our man has rather less grip. But I guess that's enough 'Hitler better than Johnson' talk. We'll get ourselves banned and that would be a complete travesty.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,150

    Florida reports 21,683 new coronavirus cases, the biggest one-day increase on record, and 108 new deaths

    From a state from a suspected history of serious under-reporting. Of course it’s possible that the GOP are getting increasingly worried about their voters dying and have decided that it is in their interest to change tack on this...
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 11,907
    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
    PS But then some of the emperors and top class types were of varied skin colour too. IIRC English Heritage came a cropper with the DM tendency when they showed that happening at, I think, York, or Eboracum as one should properly say.
    Septimius Severus was probably black, and died at Eboracum in 211. Born at Leptis Magna in Libya, which had probably grown rich, rather horribly, on the sheer volume of wild beasts being exported to Rome for the amphitheatre.
  • What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
    PS But then some of the emperors and top class types were of varied skin colour too. IIRC English Heritage came a cropper with the DM tendency when they showed that happening at, I think, York, or Eboracum as one should properly say.
    Septimius Severus was probably black, and died at Eboracum in 211. Born at Leptis Magna in Libya, which had probably grown rich, rather horribly, on the sheer volume of wild beasts being exported to Rome for the amphitheatre.
    That's the chap. I seem to recall some visitors were so surprised to find a black chap in the bumf for visitors that there was a suggestion of wokery (avant la lettre) gone mad - it wasn't a big row, but it did highlight how few people realised the multiracial nature of the Imperium.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 11,907

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Greensill.

    That is all.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    edited July 2021
    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    To which I would add. Where is the demand? Unless it is made compulsory not many will choose it at 14. Few continue French, Spanish, etc. when given the choice.
    All of the above are perfectly valid reasons why it isn't taught now.
    That the Tory Party is so ignorant of the basics of both supply and demand. A visitor from 2007 would be astonished.
    And it's not as if I'm against the classics - as a result of my O levels I've been to more castra and urbes in my lifetime than you can shake a pilum at.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 4,693

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 2,158
    pigeon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    The Olympics needs a dramatic new sport

    I reckon it is time to reintroduce pok-ta-pok: the Mesomaerican ball game (of the Maya, Aztecs, etc)

    It is simple but quite compelling. Two teams of maybe four players each compete on a hard stone ball-court, not unlike a real tennis court. With bats, arms and hips they propel a large, firm rubber ball at each other and also at a stone hoop placed high to the side. Victory is achieved via points, or by slotting the ball through the hoop.

    it's not a game for the faint hearted, however. For example, the ball is genuinely hard, and can cause severe bruising, internal injuries - even death in extreme cases. Also, at the end of the game the entire losing team is ritually sacrificed by decapitation, and after that they also sacrifice and dismember the entire winning team. And then the next teams play, for a while, with the severed heads and hands.

    So it might not be quite in tune with the Woke agenda in British Olympics, but on the other hand the inquest into TeamGB's performance would be rendered largely pointless, thus saving money?

    Perhaps just a tad severe...

    Chariot racing and horse archery are both ancient disciplines ripe for revival. In a previous thread I also invented elephant javelin, but the provision of the necessary animals could prove somewhat challenging. Horse javelin could still be fantastic though.

    Also, jousting.
    Horse archery is allegedly possible because at the gallop horses have all 4 feet of the ground at one stage, giving you the still platform you need for archery. Elephants don't gallop, making javelin chucking problematic.
    Elephants can get up a fair turn of speed, but yes, horses would be more practical.

    My conception of the mounted javelin event (as distinct from how they would actually have been used by skirmishers in ancient warfare) is as follows: rider charges down a runway as fast as possible, utilising the momentum of the animal to help launch the projectile. The skill, rather as with traditional javelin, is to hurl the implement along an optimal trajectory and with as much force as possible, without crossing the line at the end of the track.

    Co-ordinating the chucking of the spear and controlling the animal ought to make for a challenge and a spectacle!
    Yes but does it work on ice?! This is what the people (me) want to know.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808

    pigeon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    The Olympics needs a dramatic new sport

    I reckon it is time to reintroduce pok-ta-pok: the Mesomaerican ball game (of the Maya, Aztecs, etc)

    It is simple but quite compelling. Two teams of maybe four players each compete on a hard stone ball-court, not unlike a real tennis court. With bats, arms and hips they propel a large, firm rubber ball at each other and also at a stone hoop placed high to the side. Victory is achieved via points, or by slotting the ball through the hoop.

    it's not a game for the faint hearted, however. For example, the ball is genuinely hard, and can cause severe bruising, internal injuries - even death in extreme cases. Also, at the end of the game the entire losing team is ritually sacrificed by decapitation, and after that they also sacrifice and dismember the entire winning team. And then the next teams play, for a while, with the severed heads and hands.

    So it might not be quite in tune with the Woke agenda in British Olympics, but on the other hand the inquest into TeamGB's performance would be rendered largely pointless, thus saving money?

    Perhaps just a tad severe...

    Chariot racing and horse archery are both ancient disciplines ripe for revival. In a previous thread I also invented elephant javelin, but the provision of the necessary animals could prove somewhat challenging. Horse javelin could still be fantastic though.

    Also, jousting.
    Horse archery is allegedly possible because at the gallop horses have all 4 feet of the ground at one stage, giving you the still platform you need for archery. Elephants don't gallop, making javelin chucking problematic.
    Elephants can get up a fair turn of speed, but yes, horses would be more practical.

    My conception of the mounted javelin event (as distinct from how they would actually have been used by skirmishers in ancient warfare) is as follows: rider charges down a runway as fast as possible, utilising the momentum of the animal to help launch the projectile. The skill, rather as with traditional javelin, is to hurl the implement along an optimal trajectory and with as much force as possible, without crossing the line at the end of the track.

    Co-ordinating the chucking of the spear and controlling the animal ought to make for a challenge and a spectacle!
    Yes but does it work on ice?! This is what the people (me) want to know.
    No problem. Make it elephant curling, and make the elephant hold the broom. Now that would be something to watch.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Greensill.

    That is all.
    Dave was exonerated.
  • What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.

    technically it's when they realise that they are in no position to be voted back in any time soon that it happens. Labour 1992-1994, Tory 2005
  • MattWMattW Posts: 11,898
    edited July 2021
    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.
    Ah, like the old Classical Studies.

    But that isn't the 'Latin' some people seem to imagine, and which I had - undiluted. The nearest I ever got to any alleviation of straight Latin and Greek (in the 1970s) was one lesson where the map of a Roman camp was drawn on the blackboard. Any outings were strictly extracurricular and free time.





    I don't know.

    It could be Latin with classics as part of it.

    But we know the mode of some of our media is to fixate on a word and start doing a war dance.

    Checking, it seems that Latin is taught nearly everywhere in Europe.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instruction_in_Latin

    So we can import some teachers from mainland Europe :-). I wonder if FBPE types are enthusiasts?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,252
    Carnyx said:

    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    To which I would add. Where is the demand? Unless it is made compulsory not many will choose it at 14. Few continue French, Spanish, etc. when given the choice.
    All of the above are perfectly valid reasons why it isn't taught now.
    That the Tory Party is so ignorant of the basics of both supply and demand. A visitor from 2007 would be astonished.
    And it's not as if I'm against the classics - as a result of my O levels I've been to more castra and urbes in my lifetime than you can shake a pilum at.
    Me neither. I have Latin O Level.
    Wouldn't have advised my two to take it.
    Would be utterly flabbergasted if either had shown any interest whatsoever.
    Not entirely sure where or why this idea emerged. Not very culture war.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    kinabalu said:

    Carnyx said:

    kinabalu said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Point of order. The Fuehrer did not design the KdF-wagen. He was the facilitator, commissioner, etc. Herr Dr Porsche led the design team. Producer and director, if you like.
    Adolf Hitler similar to Boris Johnson (on the vaccine) then in this regard? Would that be fair?
    On second thoughts:

    The Fuehrer had a clear vision of a modern Germany with Autobahnen (also convenient for internal LOC for switching fronts). So, as well as an Organization Todt to build the aforesaid A-bahnen, the approved members of the German Volk needed a nice cheap(ish) car to be part of the Volk community and go out for approved Volkish outings. And a motor industry to stimulate to provide factories which could be used to motorise the Wehrmacht (as, indeed, happened to the Vokswagen factory when the lines were switched from KdF-Wagen to Kuebelwagen and Schwimmwagen for the war effort - hence, IIRC. the raised suspension later used on the VW Bus).

    You can draw your own comparison of Mr Johnson's clarity of overarching vision and consistency in pursuing his own aims.
    Interesting. So I'd say our man has rather less grip. But I guess that's enough 'Hitler better than Johnson' talk. We'll get ourselves banned and that would be a complete travesty.
    And that's before we start talking about their respective visions for long distance high speed railways. The Fuehrer was channelling I. K. Brunel a lot more than you know who. Not that the Breitspurbahn ever got built, never mind running.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 1,616

    pigeon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    The Olympics needs a dramatic new sport

    I reckon it is time to reintroduce pok-ta-pok: the Mesomaerican ball game (of the Maya, Aztecs, etc)

    It is simple but quite compelling. Two teams of maybe four players each compete on a hard stone ball-court, not unlike a real tennis court. With bats, arms and hips they propel a large, firm rubber ball at each other and also at a stone hoop placed high to the side. Victory is achieved via points, or by slotting the ball through the hoop.

    it's not a game for the faint hearted, however. For example, the ball is genuinely hard, and can cause severe bruising, internal injuries - even death in extreme cases. Also, at the end of the game the entire losing team is ritually sacrificed by decapitation, and after that they also sacrifice and dismember the entire winning team. And then the next teams play, for a while, with the severed heads and hands.

    So it might not be quite in tune with the Woke agenda in British Olympics, but on the other hand the inquest into TeamGB's performance would be rendered largely pointless, thus saving money?

    Perhaps just a tad severe...

    Chariot racing and horse archery are both ancient disciplines ripe for revival. In a previous thread I also invented elephant javelin, but the provision of the necessary animals could prove somewhat challenging. Horse javelin could still be fantastic though.

    Also, jousting.
    Horse archery is allegedly possible because at the gallop horses have all 4 feet of the ground at one stage, giving you the still platform you need for archery. Elephants don't gallop, making javelin chucking problematic.
    Elephants can get up a fair turn of speed, but yes, horses would be more practical.

    My conception of the mounted javelin event (as distinct from how they would actually have been used by skirmishers in ancient warfare) is as follows: rider charges down a runway as fast as possible, utilising the momentum of the animal to help launch the projectile. The skill, rather as with traditional javelin, is to hurl the implement along an optimal trajectory and with as much force as possible, without crossing the line at the end of the track.

    Co-ordinating the chucking of the spear and controlling the animal ought to make for a challenge and a spectacle!
    Yes but does it work on ice?! This is what the people (me) want to know.
    Ice: probably not such a good idea. Snow: definitely. The Winter Olympic version would use a sleigh drawn by a troika, or perhaps reindeer.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 11,907

    IshmaelZ said:

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Greensill.

    That is all.
    Dave was exonerated.
    :lol::lol::lol:

    You will be the death of me.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 11,907
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    Genderqueer, Moon Unit.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,252
    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
    PS But then some of the emperors and top class types were of varied skin colour too. IIRC English Heritage came a cropper with the DM tendency when they showed that happening at, I think, York, or Eboracum as one should properly say.
    Septimius Severus was probably black, and died at Eboracum in 211. Born at Leptis Magna in Libya, which had probably grown rich, rather horribly, on the sheer volume of wild beasts being exported to Rome for the amphitheatre.
    That's the chap. I seem to recall some visitors were so surprised to find a black chap in the bumf for visitors that there was a suggestion of wokery (avant la lettre) gone mad - it wasn't a big row, but it did highlight how few people realised the multiracial nature of the Imperium.
    There are a couple of monuments at Arbeia. One a Syrian merchant's tribute to his wife from Hertfordshire. One to Victor a freed slave "of the Moorish nation."
    The Roman Army was hugely diverse. And intermarrying extensively.
    They didn't seem to make a big deal of skin colour. Or is that naive?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,725
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    Alice? Don't legitimate Johnson daughters have unusual, sometimes salad related names?
  • We should let Englishman take the penalties, the Welshies just aren't up to it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
    PS But then some of the emperors and top class types were of varied skin colour too. IIRC English Heritage came a cropper with the DM tendency when they showed that happening at, I think, York, or Eboracum as one should properly say.
    Septimius Severus was probably black, and died at Eboracum in 211. Born at Leptis Magna in Libya, which had probably grown rich, rather horribly, on the sheer volume of wild beasts being exported to Rome for the amphitheatre.
    That's the chap. I seem to recall some visitors were so surprised to find a black chap in the bumf for visitors that there was a suggestion of wokery (avant la lettre) gone mad - it wasn't a big row, but it did highlight how few people realised the multiracial nature of the Imperium.
    There are a couple of monuments at Arbeia. One a Syrian merchant's tribute to his wife from Hertfordshire. One to Victor a freed slave "of the Moorish nation."
    The Roman Army was hugely diverse. And intermarrying extensively.
    They didn't seem to make a big deal of skin colour. Or is that naive?
    I do wonder too.

    When I visited Bar Hill - which as it says on the tin is on top of a hill - on the Antonine Wall recently I was intrigued to find that it had been occupied by the Cohors Primae Hamiorum Sagittariorum - the Hamians being archers from Syria. The bathhouse must have been very popular in the winter wirth the wind howling over the hill.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 1,616

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
    Charles will probably end up as an Edward VII-type figure, reigning for a few years in later life and being surprisingly popular.

    The Royal Family's going nowhere any time soon. Sorry.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,150

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
    I know that until now you have been known as a committed royalist, so it is surprising that you have chosen to focus on a story that begins “the chairman of the Conservative Party profited...” into a reason to get rid of the monarchy. But clearly you must have been shaken to your core by the story so perhaps it must truly be devastating for Prince Charles’ future, to discover that some of his charities might not have received money for totally altruistic reasons...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,190
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Quintus.

    In re fili praevii:

    Dura_Ace said:



    I can say things in French. But if I ask a question and receive a reply, usually I have no idea what the other person has said.

    We should just teach kids how to order a coffee, order a beer and say 'I love you' in a dozen languages and settle for that.

    My father said wryly that he learned French for 6 years at Winchester, and then took a trip to Paris;he found he was unable to ask the inspector when they would arrive.


    I was educated in French only until I was 12 and couldn't really write English at that age. When I got to English speaking schools in the US and UK I was amazed at how little grammar was taught compared to my Francophone education.

    Now that I'm a language tutor I see the same situation among British students. Teaching Latin would help slightly as they would be exposed to grammatical concepts like declension. There is almost no declension in English but it's very important in other languages. I regularly see anglophone students struggle with it in Russian.

    It could be fixed much more effectively by teaching Linguistics rather than Latin but that would not stimulate the desiccated G spots of Telegraph readers with type 2 diabetes in the same way so the tories won't do it.
    I wonder if the Latin is because its full of gender to troll the wokists?

    Also - because it gives those parents with money to send their brats to private schools an advantage? At the moment Latin can't seriously be used as an educational criterion. It's like an O level in sheep-farming - only the Welsh, etc., have a hope of doing it. But make it a general educational qualification ...

    Rachel Johnson (as in sister of ...) suggested rote learning of the classics was a soft route to Oxford.
    So why would Tories want more competition for their children's life chances?
    Tokenism. The Universities might dump the classics if it became obvious they are an upper middle class scam. You want a trickle of comp school entrants to point at and claim how inclusive it all is.
    There is not much to dump, the only universities which still do pure Classics/Latin degrees are Oxford and Cambridge, St Andrews, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Exeter and Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol, KCL and UCL and Royal Holloway.

    They are all pretty posh universities anyway
    So?

    If cutting the classics means an instant downwards improvement to the posho-meter reading , to help meet the targets mandated by government, they'll have to consider it very seriously.
    It is dumbing down and would make barely any difference whatsoever, as they are tiny courses anyway.

    We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care, we support selection on merit and high academic standards, hence Williamson is pushing Latin in state schools. So if they want to suck up to Williamson if anything universities will expand their classics courses and do state school outreach for them.

    Plus not all classics students will be privately educated and Oxbridge are 60% state school now anyway
    ‘Leading Tory says they “do not care” about state schools’

    You need to be more careful about your choice of words if you want to progress in politics
    What an absurd distortion of what I said.

    I did not once say 'I do not care about state schools' if anything I care more than Carnyx as like Williamson I want to spread Latin in our state schools and expand excellence in them (a few more grammars would help too).

    If you would prefer to keep excellence and Latin confined to your alma mater of Eton that is your affair
    What you wrote is precisely that you have set no state school target and that you don't care.

    I recommend doing a Latin O level to see how language works. (I did. And Greek too.)
    Indeed, I am not a socialist who believes in positive discrimination and targets and equality of outcome.

    I believe in expanding excellence and equality of opportunity as a Tory
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,725

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
    Please, George VII.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,607

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    Power and politics is what it is and always has been, left and right and all shades. power corrupts and is corrupting. The limits of it are exactly that 40%+ of the people can kick the rascals out; the difficulty is that the realities of power are such that there is little choice but to put the other rascals in in their place.

    (For example, many Labour party members have strong sympathies with the regime in Venezuela. According to the UNHCR there are 5.4 million refugees and migrants from that country right now, a figure I find almost impossible to believe.)

    However our system is such a vast improvement on all the alternatives that we should not lose sight of the merits.

  • StockyStocky Posts: 7,661
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    If a boy, I bet he won't be named John Lewis.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,190
    edited July 2021
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Quintus.

    In re fili praevii:

    Dura_Ace said:



    I can say things in French. But if I ask a question and receive a reply, usually I have no idea what the other person has said.

    We should just teach kids how to order a coffee, order a beer and say 'I love you' in a dozen languages and settle for that.

    My father said wryly that he learned French for 6 years at Winchester, and then took a trip to Paris;he found he was unable to ask the inspector when they would arrive.


    I was educated in French only until I was 12 and couldn't really write English at that age. When I got to English speaking schools in the US and UK I was amazed at how little grammar was taught compared to my Francophone education.

    Now that I'm a language tutor I see the same situation among British students. Teaching Latin would help slightly as they would be exposed to grammatical concepts like declension. There is almost no declension in English but it's very important in other languages. I regularly see anglophone students struggle with it in Russian.

    It could be fixed much more effectively by teaching Linguistics rather than Latin but that would not stimulate the desiccated G spots of Telegraph readers with type 2 diabetes in the same way so the tories won't do it.
    I wonder if the Latin is because its full of gender to troll the wokists?

    Also - because it gives those parents with money to send their brats to private schools an advantage? At the moment Latin can't seriously be used as an educational criterion. It's like an O level in sheep-farming - only the Welsh, etc., have a hope of doing it. But make it a general educational qualification ...

    Rachel Johnson (as in sister of ...) suggested rote learning of the classics was a soft route to Oxford.
    So why would Tories want more competition for their children's life chances?
    Tokenism. The Universities might dump the classics if it became obvious they are an upper middle class scam. You want a trickle of comp school entrants to point at and claim how inclusive it all is.
    There is not much to dump, the only universities which still do pure Classics/Latin degrees are Oxford and Cambridge, St Andrews, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Exeter and Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol, KCL and UCL and Royal Holloway.

    They are all pretty posh universities anyway
    So?

    If cutting the classics means an instant downwards improvement to the posho-meter reading , to help meet the targets mandated by government, they'll have to consider it very seriously.
    It is dumbing down and would make barely any difference whatsoever, as they are tiny courses anyway.

    We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care, we support selection on merit and high academic standards, hence Williamson is pushing Latin in state schools. So if they want to suck up to Williamson if anything universities will expand their classics courses and do state school outreach for them.

    Plus not all classics students will be privately educated and Oxbridge are 60% state school now anyway
    ‘Leading Tory says they “do not care” about state schools’

    You need to be more careful about your choice of words if you want to progress in politics
    What an absurd distortion of what I said.

    I did not once say 'I do not care about state schools', merely I want selection on merit. If anything I care more than Carnyx as like Williamson I want to spread Latin in our state schools and expand excellence in them (a few more grammars would help too).

    If you would prefer to keep excellence and Latin confined to your alma mater of Eton and a few top public schools and a conveyor belt to Oxbridge and the top professions like law and medicine and banking that is your affair
    “ We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care”

    “We Tories… have set no state school target, we … do not care”

    Of course it’s absurd. But that’s a direct quote.

    It’s meant as friendly advice, so don’t get upset.
    Yes, the whole point of being a Tory is we don't believe in setting socialist style targets for state school admissions to leading universities like Oxbridge.

    We believe in treating private and state school applicants equally on merit. We do not care about equality of outcome and state school targets.
    '
    Otherwise what is the point in being a Tory? Your 'friendly advice' is to stop being a Tory as far as I can see
  • alex_ said:

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
    I know that until now you have been known as a committed royalist, so it is surprising that you have chosen to focus on a story that begins “the chairman of the Conservative Party profited...” into a reason to get rid of the monarchy. But clearly you must have been shaken to your core by the story so perhaps it must truly be devastating for Prince Charles’ future, to discover that some of his charities might not have received money for totally altruistic reasons...
    It is a series of article, Prince Charles is also sleazy in all of this.

    See this article.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/access-capitalism-scandal-a-dinner-with-prince-charles-then-the-begging-letter-arrived-kngk0xqfk
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,252
    Carnyx said:

    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
    PS But then some of the emperors and top class types were of varied skin colour too. IIRC English Heritage came a cropper with the DM tendency when they showed that happening at, I think, York, or Eboracum as one should properly say.
    Septimius Severus was probably black, and died at Eboracum in 211. Born at Leptis Magna in Libya, which had probably grown rich, rather horribly, on the sheer volume of wild beasts being exported to Rome for the amphitheatre.
    That's the chap. I seem to recall some visitors were so surprised to find a black chap in the bumf for visitors that there was a suggestion of wokery (avant la lettre) gone mad - it wasn't a big row, but it did highlight how few people realised the multiracial nature of the Imperium.
    There are a couple of monuments at Arbeia. One a Syrian merchant's tribute to his wife from Hertfordshire. One to Victor a freed slave "of the Moorish nation."
    The Roman Army was hugely diverse. And intermarrying extensively.
    They didn't seem to make a big deal of skin colour. Or is that naive?
    I do wonder too.

    When I visited Bar Hill - which as it says on the tin is on top of a hill - on the Antonine Wall recently I was intrigued to find that it had been occupied by the Cohors Primae Hamiorum Sagittariorum - the Hamians being archers from Syria. The bathhouse must have been very popular in the winter wirth the wind howling over the hill.
    Yes. There were Syrian legions at Chesters and Vindolanda. Discovered letters at the latter are why we know the Latin for underpants.
    Concerned relatives having sent over woolly ones for the winter.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    algarkirk said:

    However our system is such a vast improvement on all the alternatives that we should not lose sight of the merits.

    to quote Churchill "democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried."
  • Got to say Sir Lewis Hamilton is living rent free in the heads of Christian Horner and Max Verstappen.

    Glorious.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,150
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Quintus.

    In re fili praevii:

    Dura_Ace said:



    I can say things in French. But if I ask a question and receive a reply, usually I have no idea what the other person has said.

    We should just teach kids how to order a coffee, order a beer and say 'I love you' in a dozen languages and settle for that.

    My father said wryly that he learned French for 6 years at Winchester, and then took a trip to Paris;he found he was unable to ask the inspector when they would arrive.


    I was educated in French only until I was 12 and couldn't really write English at that age. When I got to English speaking schools in the US and UK I was amazed at how little grammar was taught compared to my Francophone education.

    Now that I'm a language tutor I see the same situation among British students. Teaching Latin would help slightly as they would be exposed to grammatical concepts like declension. There is almost no declension in English but it's very important in other languages. I regularly see anglophone students struggle with it in Russian.

    It could be fixed much more effectively by teaching Linguistics rather than Latin but that would not stimulate the desiccated G spots of Telegraph readers with type 2 diabetes in the same way so the tories won't do it.
    I wonder if the Latin is because its full of gender to troll the wokists?

    Also - because it gives those parents with money to send their brats to private schools an advantage? At the moment Latin can't seriously be used as an educational criterion. It's like an O level in sheep-farming - only the Welsh, etc., have a hope of doing it. But make it a general educational qualification ...

    Rachel Johnson (as in sister of ...) suggested rote learning of the classics was a soft route to Oxford.
    So why would Tories want more competition for their children's life chances?
    Tokenism. The Universities might dump the classics if it became obvious they are an upper middle class scam. You want a trickle of comp school entrants to point at and claim how inclusive it all is.
    There is not much to dump, the only universities which still do pure Classics/Latin degrees are Oxford and Cambridge, St Andrews, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Exeter and Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol, KCL and UCL and Royal Holloway.

    They are all pretty posh universities anyway
    So?

    If cutting the classics means an instant downwards improvement to the posho-meter reading , to help meet the targets mandated by government, they'll have to consider it very seriously.
    It is dumbing down and would make barely any difference whatsoever, as they are tiny courses anyway.

    We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care, we support selection on merit and high academic standards, hence Williamson is pushing Latin in state schools. So if they want to suck up to Williamson if anything universities will expand their classics courses and do state school outreach for them.

    Plus not all classics students will be privately educated and Oxbridge are 60% state school now anyway
    ‘Leading Tory says they “do not care” about state schools’

    You need to be more careful about your choice of words if you want to progress in politics
    What an absurd distortion of what I said.

    I did not once say 'I do not care about state schools', merely I want selection on merit. If anything I care more than Carnyx as like Williamson I want to spread Latin in our state schools and expand excellence in them (a few more grammars would help too).

    If you would prefer to keep excellence and Latin confined to your alma mater of Eton and a few top public schools and a conveyor belt to Oxbridge and the top professions like law and medicine and banking that is your affair
    “ We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care”

    “We Tories… have set no state school target, we … do not care”

    Of course it’s absurd. But that’s a direct quote.

    It’s meant as friendly advice, so don’t get upset.
    Yes, the whole point of being a Tory is we don't believe in setting socialist style targets for state school admissions to leading universities like Oxbridge.

    We believe in treating private and state school applicants equally on merit. We do not care about equality of outcome and state school targets.
    '
    Otherwise what is the point in being a Tory? Your 'friendly advice' is to stop being a Tory as far as I can see
    The question is how you judge merit
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,607

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
    Please, George VII.
    FWIW (and I have no wish to abolish the monarchy, quite the reverse) the precedent is reasonably clear: we live in parliamentary democracy and parliament has the power to abolish the monarchy, or alter it in whatever way it chooses, as it has done before, including recently with the abolition of male primogeniture.

    Good luck to any party proposing to abolish the prospect of William and Kate. 'Brave' would be the word.



  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
    PS But then some of the emperors and top class types were of varied skin colour too. IIRC English Heritage came a cropper with the DM tendency when they showed that happening at, I think, York, or Eboracum as one should properly say.
    Septimius Severus was probably black, and died at Eboracum in 211. Born at Leptis Magna in Libya, which had probably grown rich, rather horribly, on the sheer volume of wild beasts being exported to Rome for the amphitheatre.
    That's the chap. I seem to recall some visitors were so surprised to find a black chap in the bumf for visitors that there was a suggestion of wokery (avant la lettre) gone mad - it wasn't a big row, but it did highlight how few people realised the multiracial nature of the Imperium.
    There are a couple of monuments at Arbeia. One a Syrian merchant's tribute to his wife from Hertfordshire. One to Victor a freed slave "of the Moorish nation."
    The Roman Army was hugely diverse. And intermarrying extensively.
    They didn't seem to make a big deal of skin colour. Or is that naive?
    I do wonder too.

    When I visited Bar Hill - which as it says on the tin is on top of a hill - on the Antonine Wall recently I was intrigued to find that it had been occupied by the Cohors Primae Hamiorum Sagittariorum - the Hamians being archers from Syria. The bathhouse must have been very popular in the winter wirth the wind howling over the hill.
    Yes. There were Syrian legions at Chesters and Vindolanda. Discovered letters at the latter are why we know the Latin for underpants.
    Concerned relatives having sent over woolly ones for the winter.
    Butd we didn't get that in "Latin". The lucky sods/inferior souls (delete not applicable) who did "Classical Studies" did ( or what was known at that pre-Vindolanda tablets period).

    And it is "Latin" which Mr Williamson is talking about (the odd visit out aside, if the pupils' families can afford it).
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    edited July 2021
    alex_ said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Quintus.

    In re fili praevii:

    Dura_Ace said:



    I can say things in French. But if I ask a question and receive a reply, usually I have no idea what the other person has said.

    We should just teach kids how to order a coffee, order a beer and say 'I love you' in a dozen languages and settle for that.

    My father said wryly that he learned French for 6 years at Winchester, and then took a trip to Paris;he found he was unable to ask the inspector when they would arrive.


    I was educated in French only until I was 12 and couldn't really write English at that age. When I got to English speaking schools in the US and UK I was amazed at how little grammar was taught compared to my Francophone education.

    Now that I'm a language tutor I see the same situation among British students. Teaching Latin would help slightly as they would be exposed to grammatical concepts like declension. There is almost no declension in English but it's very important in other languages. I regularly see anglophone students struggle with it in Russian.

    It could be fixed much more effectively by teaching Linguistics rather than Latin but that would not stimulate the desiccated G spots of Telegraph readers with type 2 diabetes in the same way so the tories won't do it.
    I wonder if the Latin is because its full of gender to troll the wokists?

    Also - because it gives those parents with money to send their brats to private schools an advantage? At the moment Latin can't seriously be used as an educational criterion. It's like an O level in sheep-farming - only the Welsh, etc., have a hope of doing it. But make it a general educational qualification ...

    Rachel Johnson (as in sister of ...) suggested rote learning of the classics was a soft route to Oxford.
    So why would Tories want more competition for their children's life chances?
    Tokenism. The Universities might dump the classics if it became obvious they are an upper middle class scam. You want a trickle of comp school entrants to point at and claim how inclusive it all is.
    There is not much to dump, the only universities which still do pure Classics/Latin degrees are Oxford and Cambridge, St Andrews, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Exeter and Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol, KCL and UCL and Royal Holloway.

    They are all pretty posh universities anyway
    So?

    If cutting the classics means an instant downwards improvement to the posho-meter reading , to help meet the targets mandated by government, they'll have to consider it very seriously.
    It is dumbing down and would make barely any difference whatsoever, as they are tiny courses anyway.

    We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care, we support selection on merit and high academic standards, hence Williamson is pushing Latin in state schools. So if they want to suck up to Williamson if anything universities will expand their classics courses and do state school outreach for them.

    Plus not all classics students will be privately educated and Oxbridge are 60% state school now anyway
    ‘Leading Tory says they “do not care” about state schools’

    You need to be more careful about your choice of words if you want to progress in politics
    What an absurd distortion of what I said.

    I did not once say 'I do not care about state schools', merely I want selection on merit. If anything I care more than Carnyx as like Williamson I want to spread Latin in our state schools and expand excellence in them (a few more grammars would help too).

    If you would prefer to keep excellence and Latin confined to your alma mater of Eton and a few top public schools and a conveyor belt to Oxbridge and the top professions like law and medicine and banking that is your affair
    “ We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care”

    “We Tories… have set no state school target, we … do not care”

    Of course it’s absurd. But that’s a direct quote.

    It’s meant as friendly advice, so don’t get upset.
    Yes, the whole point of being a Tory is we don't believe in setting socialist style targets for state school admissions to leading universities like Oxbridge.

    We believe in treating private and state school applicants equally on merit. We do not care about equality of outcome and state school targets.
    '
    Otherwise what is the point in being a Tory? Your 'friendly advice' is to stop being a Tory as far as I can see
    The question is how you judge merit
    And whether equality of opportunity is being achieved.

    Hence the importance of HYUFD saying he doesn't give a rodent's backside about actually using the crucial statistic [edit} in decision making.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,607
    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    dixiedean said:

    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    I think you are getting a bit overexcited tbh.

    It is a 4 year trial costing £4m at 40 schools about classics with Latin as part of it aiui. One thing mentioned is visits to Roman sites. Sounds like a really good idea. I'd also put it into the box of understanding our own cultural history. And nice to see some extra diversity in some schools.

    I would expect it to be an option.

    And Mary Beard likes it.

    Can even be used to teach about slavery I suppose, but the slaves might be partly the wrong skin colour so the de-colonialisers might not like it.
    PS But then some of the emperors and top class types were of varied skin colour too. IIRC English Heritage came a cropper with the DM tendency when they showed that happening at, I think, York, or Eboracum as one should properly say.
    Septimius Severus was probably black, and died at Eboracum in 211. Born at Leptis Magna in Libya, which had probably grown rich, rather horribly, on the sheer volume of wild beasts being exported to Rome for the amphitheatre.
    That's the chap. I seem to recall some visitors were so surprised to find a black chap in the bumf for visitors that there was a suggestion of wokery (avant la lettre) gone mad - it wasn't a big row, but it did highlight how few people realised the multiracial nature of the Imperium.
    There are a couple of monuments at Arbeia. One a Syrian merchant's tribute to his wife from Hertfordshire. One to Victor a freed slave "of the Moorish nation."
    The Roman Army was hugely diverse. And intermarrying extensively.
    They didn't seem to make a big deal of skin colour. Or is that naive?
    I do wonder too.

    When I visited Bar Hill - which as it says on the tin is on top of a hill - on the Antonine Wall recently I was intrigued to find that it had been occupied by the Cohors Primae Hamiorum Sagittariorum - the Hamians being archers from Syria. The bathhouse must have been very popular in the winter wirth the wind howling over the hill.
    Yes. There were Syrian legions at Chesters and Vindolanda. Discovered letters at the latter are why we know the Latin for underpants.
    Concerned relatives having sent over woolly ones for the winter.
    An inscription in Palmyrene was found at South Shields.

    BTW Augustine and Tertullian will have been black.

  • pm215pm215 Posts: 165
    dixiedean said:


    The Roman Army was hugely diverse. And intermarrying extensively.
    They didn't seem to make a big deal of skin colour. Or is that naive?

    If you are in the mood for some long blog posts on that topic by a Roman military historian, I can recommend Bret Devereaux's just finished 5-part series of posts on Roman identity and diversity. He gets into the skin colour question in particular in part 4. (The short answer seems to be that yes, you're right -- the Romans had their fair share of bigotry, but their dividing lines and the way they thought didn't line up with the modern racism-as-tied-into-skin-colour concept.)

    The whole blog is excellent, in fact; strongly recommended.


  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    algarkirk said:

    FWIW (and I have no wish to abolish the monarchy, quite the reverse) the precedent is reasonably clear: we live in parliamentary democracy and parliament has the power to abolish the monarchy, or alter it in whatever way it chooses, as it has done before, including recently with the abolition of male primogeniture.

    Good luck to any party proposing to abolish the prospect of William and Kate. 'Brave' would be the word.

    that's not strictly true. Parliament can only change the monarchy with the monarchs consent. any bills going through parliament to that extent would require royal assent (which would only happen with popular support from a referendum).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,190

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
    Far from it, he will make a fine monarch, ahead of his time already on issues like climate change and with a keen interest in heritage and architecture. The Princes Trust has also done great work with young people.

    However he is unlikely to have a long reign. Much as Edward VII became King at 60 and only reigned for 9 years before death after the 64 year reign of his mother Queen Victoria. Charles will become King even later, he is already over 70 and his mother, Queen Elizabeth IInd has been on the throne even longer than Victoria for 69 years.

    Much as Edward VII was squeezed between the significantly longer reigns of his mother and his son, George Vth, so Charles will likely be squeezed between the significantly longer reigns of his mother and his son, William Vth.

    However there is no reason Charles IIIrd cannot have a perfectly good reign in his short time as his great great grandfather did

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 18,563
    Big scoop tonight from @hzeffman and @Gabriel_Pogrund

    Ben Elliott, the chairman of the Conservative Party, has been accused by a major Tory donor of profiting from giving ultra wealthy clients access to Prince Charles https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1421517695409852423
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    Genderqueer, Moon Unit.
    You'd love to see it. That's a Zappa child, isn't it. Triggers memories of that album of his, Sheik Yerbouti.

    "Hey there people I'm Bobby Brown ..."

    What a song. What an LP in fact.
  • Another scandalous refereeing decision.

    The bullshit from Rassie Erasmus has worked and influenced the referee and TMO.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,190
    edited July 2021
    alex_ said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Quintus.

    In re fili praevii:

    Dura_Ace said:



    I can say things in French. But if I ask a question and receive a reply, usually I have no idea what the other person has said.

    We should just teach kids how to order a coffee, order a beer and say 'I love you' in a dozen languages and settle for that.

    My father said wryly that he learned French for 6 years at Winchester, and then took a trip to Paris;he found he was unable to ask the inspector when they would arrive.


    I was educated in French only until I was 12 and couldn't really write English at that age. When I got to English speaking schools in the US and UK I was amazed at how little grammar was taught compared to my Francophone education.

    Now that I'm a language tutor I see the same situation among British students. Teaching Latin would help slightly as they would be exposed to grammatical concepts like declension. There is almost no declension in English but it's very important in other languages. I regularly see anglophone students struggle with it in Russian.

    It could be fixed much more effectively by teaching Linguistics rather than Latin but that would not stimulate the desiccated G spots of Telegraph readers with type 2 diabetes in the same way so the tories won't do it.
    I wonder if the Latin is because its full of gender to troll the wokists?

    Also - because it gives those parents with money to send their brats to private schools an advantage? At the moment Latin can't seriously be used as an educational criterion. It's like an O level in sheep-farming - only the Welsh, etc., have a hope of doing it. But make it a general educational qualification ...

    Rachel Johnson (as in sister of ...) suggested rote learning of the classics was a soft route to Oxford.
    So why would Tories want more competition for their children's life chances?
    Tokenism. The Universities might dump the classics if it became obvious they are an upper middle class scam. You want a trickle of comp school entrants to point at and claim how inclusive it all is.
    There is not much to dump, the only universities which still do pure Classics/Latin degrees are Oxford and Cambridge, St Andrews, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Exeter and Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol, KCL and UCL and Royal Holloway.

    They are all pretty posh universities anyway
    So?

    If cutting the classics means an instant downwards improvement to the posho-meter reading , to help meet the targets mandated by government, they'll have to consider it very seriously.
    It is dumbing down and would make barely any difference whatsoever, as they are tiny courses anyway.

    We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care, we support selection on merit and high academic standards, hence Williamson is pushing Latin in state schools. So if they want to suck up to Williamson if anything universities will expand their classics courses and do state school outreach for them.

    Plus not all classics students will be privately educated and Oxbridge are 60% state school now anyway
    ‘Leading Tory says they “do not care” about state schools’

    You need to be more careful about your choice of words if you want to progress in politics
    What an absurd distortion of what I said.

    I did not once say 'I do not care about state schools', merely I want selection on merit. If anything I care more than Carnyx as like Williamson I want to spread Latin in our state schools and expand excellence in them (a few more grammars would help too).

    If you would prefer to keep excellence and Latin confined to your alma mater of Eton and a few top public schools and a conveyor belt to Oxbridge and the top professions like law and medicine and banking that is your affair
    “ We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care”

    “We Tories… have set no state school target, we … do not care”

    Of course it’s absurd. But that’s a direct quote.

    It’s meant as friendly advice, so don’t get upset.
    Yes, the whole point of being a Tory is we don't believe in setting socialist style targets for state school admissions to leading universities like Oxbridge.

    We believe in treating private and state school applicants equally on merit. We do not care about equality of outcome and state school targets.
    '
    Otherwise what is the point in being a Tory? Your 'friendly advice' is to stop being a Tory as far as I can see
    The question is how you judge merit
    For Tories based on exam results and interview, for socialists based on value added and social deprivation etc.

    That is also why most Tories still tend to prefer grammar schools
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651
    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    If a boy, I bet he won't be named John Lewis.
    :smile: - Or Dominic.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 44,950
    spudgfsh said:

    algarkirk said:

    FWIW (and I have no wish to abolish the monarchy, quite the reverse) the precedent is reasonably clear: we live in parliamentary democracy and parliament has the power to abolish the monarchy, or alter it in whatever way it chooses, as it has done before, including recently with the abolition of male primogeniture.

    Good luck to any party proposing to abolish the prospect of William and Kate. 'Brave' would be the word.

    that's not strictly true. Parliament can only change the monarchy with the monarchs consent. any bills going through parliament to that extent would require royal assent (which would only happen with popular support from a referendum).
    Somebody should have mentioned this to the Parliament of 1688.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 4,607

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    Alice? Don't legitimate Johnson daughters have unusual, sometimes salad related names?
    One of them, Lara, was all over the Tatler recently; you needn't buy it as all the relevant piccies are in the Mail. I associate Lara with Dr Zhivago rather than salad but may be out of date.

  • kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    If a boy, I bet he won't be named John Lewis.
    :smile: - Or Dominic.
    If it is a girl she is getting named Boudica Margaret.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,190
    edited July 2021
    alex_ said:

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
    I know that until now you have been known as a committed royalist, so it is surprising that you have chosen to focus on a story that begins “the chairman of the Conservative Party profited...” into a reason to get rid of the monarchy. But clearly you must have been shaken to your core by the story so perhaps it must truly be devastating for Prince Charles’ future, to discover that some of his charities might not have received money for totally altruistic reasons...
    As a republican liberal non Tory, TSE of course has no interest in the future of the monarchy.

    Indeed post Brexit and post Dave he has no interest in the future of the Tory Party either, hence he votes LD.

    Personally I think Ben Elliott has done a fine job raising funds for the Party and the charities of the Prince of Wales
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 5,561

    Another scandalous refereeing decision.

    The bullshit from Rassie Erasmus has worked and influenced the referee and TMO.

    Really poor call.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    ydoethur said:

    spudgfsh said:

    algarkirk said:

    FWIW (and I have no wish to abolish the monarchy, quite the reverse) the precedent is reasonably clear: we live in parliamentary democracy and parliament has the power to abolish the monarchy, or alter it in whatever way it chooses, as it has done before, including recently with the abolition of male primogeniture.

    Good luck to any party proposing to abolish the prospect of William and Kate. 'Brave' would be the word.

    that's not strictly true. Parliament can only change the monarchy with the monarchs consent. any bills going through parliament to that extent would require royal assent (which would only happen with popular support from a referendum).
    Somebody should have mentioned this to the Parliament of 1688.
    There was popular support for the measures. as there was for King Chuck...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,725
    alex_ said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Quintus.

    In re fili praevii:

    Dura_Ace said:



    I can say things in French. But if I ask a question and receive a reply, usually I have no idea what the other person has said.

    We should just teach kids how to order a coffee, order a beer and say 'I love you' in a dozen languages and settle for that.

    My father said wryly that he learned French for 6 years at Winchester, and then took a trip to Paris;he found he was unable to ask the inspector when they would arrive.


    I was educated in French only until I was 12 and couldn't really write English at that age. When I got to English speaking schools in the US and UK I was amazed at how little grammar was taught compared to my Francophone education.

    Now that I'm a language tutor I see the same situation among British students. Teaching Latin would help slightly as they would be exposed to grammatical concepts like declension. There is almost no declension in English but it's very important in other languages. I regularly see anglophone students struggle with it in Russian.

    It could be fixed much more effectively by teaching Linguistics rather than Latin but that would not stimulate the desiccated G spots of Telegraph readers with type 2 diabetes in the same way so the tories won't do it.
    I wonder if the Latin is because its full of gender to troll the wokists?

    Also - because it gives those parents with money to send their brats to private schools an advantage? At the moment Latin can't seriously be used as an educational criterion. It's like an O level in sheep-farming - only the Welsh, etc., have a hope of doing it. But make it a general educational qualification ...

    Rachel Johnson (as in sister of ...) suggested rote learning of the classics was a soft route to Oxford.
    So why would Tories want more competition for their children's life chances?
    Tokenism. The Universities might dump the classics if it became obvious they are an upper middle class scam. You want a trickle of comp school entrants to point at and claim how inclusive it all is.
    There is not much to dump, the only universities which still do pure Classics/Latin degrees are Oxford and Cambridge, St Andrews, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Exeter and Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol, KCL and UCL and Royal Holloway.

    They are all pretty posh universities anyway
    So?

    If cutting the classics means an instant downwards improvement to the posho-meter reading , to help meet the targets mandated by government, they'll have to consider it very seriously.
    It is dumbing down and would make barely any difference whatsoever, as they are tiny courses anyway.

    We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care, we support selection on merit and high academic standards, hence Williamson is pushing Latin in state schools. So if they want to suck up to Williamson if anything universities will expand their classics courses and do state school outreach for them.

    Plus not all classics students will be privately educated and Oxbridge are 60% state school now anyway
    ‘Leading Tory says they “do not care” about state schools’

    You need to be more careful about your choice of words if you want to progress in politics
    What an absurd distortion of what I said.

    I did not once say 'I do not care about state schools', merely I want selection on merit. If anything I care more than Carnyx as like Williamson I want to spread Latin in our state schools and expand excellence in them (a few more grammars would help too).

    If you would prefer to keep excellence and Latin confined to your alma mater of Eton and a few top public schools and a conveyor belt to Oxbridge and the top professions like law and medicine and banking that is your affair
    “ We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care”

    “We Tories… have set no state school target, we … do not care”

    Of course it’s absurd. But that’s a direct quote.

    It’s meant as friendly advice, so don’t get upset.
    Yes, the whole point of being a Tory is we don't believe in setting socialist style targets for state school admissions to leading universities like Oxbridge.

    We believe in treating private and state school applicants equally on merit. We do not care about equality of outcome and state school targets.
    '
    Otherwise what is the point in being a Tory? Your 'friendly advice' is to stop being a Tory as far as I can see
    The question is how you judge merit
    If one or one's ancestors have worked hard or smart enough to merit purchasing an expensive education for their offspring?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 11,898
    Carnyx said:

    pigeon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    The Olympics needs a dramatic new sport

    I reckon it is time to reintroduce pok-ta-pok: the Mesomaerican ball game (of the Maya, Aztecs, etc)

    It is simple but quite compelling. Two teams of maybe four players each compete on a hard stone ball-court, not unlike a real tennis court. With bats, arms and hips they propel a large, firm rubber ball at each other and also at a stone hoop placed high to the side. Victory is achieved via points, or by slotting the ball through the hoop.

    it's not a game for the faint hearted, however. For example, the ball is genuinely hard, and can cause severe bruising, internal injuries - even death in extreme cases. Also, at the end of the game the entire losing team is ritually sacrificed by decapitation, and after that they also sacrifice and dismember the entire winning team. And then the next teams play, for a while, with the severed heads and hands.

    So it might not be quite in tune with the Woke agenda in British Olympics, but on the other hand the inquest into TeamGB's performance would be rendered largely pointless, thus saving money?

    Perhaps just a tad severe...

    Chariot racing and horse archery are both ancient disciplines ripe for revival. In a previous thread I also invented elephant javelin, but the provision of the necessary animals could prove somewhat challenging. Horse javelin could still be fantastic though.

    Also, jousting.
    Horse archery is allegedly possible because at the gallop horses have all 4 feet of the ground at one stage, giving you the still platform you need for archery. Elephants don't gallop, making javelin chucking problematic.
    Elephants can get up a fair turn of speed, but yes, horses would be more practical.

    My conception of the mounted javelin event (as distinct from how they would actually have been used by skirmishers in ancient warfare) is as follows: rider charges down a runway as fast as possible, utilising the momentum of the animal to help launch the projectile. The skill, rather as with traditional javelin, is to hurl the implement along an optimal trajectory and with as much force as possible, without crossing the line at the end of the track.

    Co-ordinating the chucking of the spear and controlling the animal ought to make for a challenge and a spectacle!
    Yes but does it work on ice?! This is what the people (me) want to know.
    No problem. Make it elephant curling, and make the elephant hold the broom. Now that would be something to watch.
    Oh come on.

    If you have an elephant you should at least get the ice cleared by the competitor making the elephant sneeze with a supplied pot of pepper.
  • Another scandalous refereeing decision.

    The bullshit from Rassie Erasmus has worked and influenced the referee and TMO.

    Really poor call.
    Stevie Wonder would have made a better TMO today.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 11,907
    HYUFD said:

    What a bunch of sleazoids. How do we get rid of these unelected rulers?

    The chairman of the Conservative Party profited from giving ultra-wealthy clients of his concierge company Quintessentially access to Prince Charles, a major party donor alleges today.

    Ben Elliot, 45, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew, introduced a member of the “elite” tier of his luxury concierge company to the future king after he had paid his company tens of thousands of pounds.

    Mohamed Amersi, 61, a telecoms millionaire, had paid an annual fee of £15,000 to be an elite member of Quintessentially, Elliot’s luxury business, for several years before it organised in 2013 for him to fly to meet the prince over an intimate dinner at Dumfries House in Scotland.

    As a result of the introduction made by Elliot, Amersi became a member of the prince’s inner circle and a trustee of one of his charities. He has since donated more than £1.2 million to the prince’s charities.

    According to leaked emails, Elliot responded to news of Amersi’s first donation to his uncle by writing: “Well done.”

    In a video interview from his Mayfair home, Amersi described this arrangement as “access capitalism”.

    Amersi’s allegations, supported by documents and by the testimony of an aristocratic whistleblower, will raise serious doubts at the apex of the establishment about Elliot’s conduct and pose the uncomfortable question of whether he has used his royal relations to bolster his business and his political position.

    They also pose difficult questions for Prince Charles, including whether he knew that his wife’s nephew was organising for ultra-wealthy clients to meet him.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-chairman-ben-elliot-peddled-access-to-prince-charles-hsw5t5bzr

    Simple.

    All it needs is for a sufficiency of people in the right parts of the country to decide that they'd rather have the alternative, even if he's a bit boring, vague and lefty, and will simultaneously betray Brexit and not do enough to thwart it.

    It's that easy and that difficult, but being voted out is literally the only thing that has brought a political party to its senses, ever.
    But how do we get rid of the Royals?

    Although five years of King Charles III should do the trick.
    Far from it, he will make a fine monarch, ahead of his time already on issues like climate change and with a keen interest in heritage and architecture. The Princes Trust has also done great work with young people.

    However he is unlikely to have a long reign. Much as Edward VII became King at 60 and only reigned for 9 years before death after the 64 year reign of his mother Queen Victoria. Charles will become King even later, he is already over 70 and his mother, Queen Elizabeth IInd has been on the throne even longer than Victoria for 69 years.

    Much as Edward VII was squeezed between the significantly longer reigns of his mother and his son, George Vth, so Charles will likely be squeezed between the significantly longer reigns of his mother and his son, William Vth.

    However there is no reason Charles IIIrd cannot have a perfectly good reign in his short time as his great great grandfather did

    You started doing VII then remembered that doesn't annoy people enough and switched to VIIth etc.

    Historical data are not very useful for assessing contemp life expectancy. His dad did 99, his Mum is what 95 and counting, and the present trend is for people to live longer than their parents. He doesn't look as lean and austere as either parent, which counts against him, but it's amazing what doctors can do to ameliorate the effects of the horrid CV events which are the result of being fattish and jolly. He's going to be around for some time.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808

    alex_ said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Quintus.

    In re fili praevii:

    Dura_Ace said:



    I can say things in French. But if I ask a question and receive a reply, usually I have no idea what the other person has said.

    We should just teach kids how to order a coffee, order a beer and say 'I love you' in a dozen languages and settle for that.

    My father said wryly that he learned French for 6 years at Winchester, and then took a trip to Paris;he found he was unable to ask the inspector when they would arrive.


    I was educated in French only until I was 12 and couldn't really write English at that age. When I got to English speaking schools in the US and UK I was amazed at how little grammar was taught compared to my Francophone education.

    Now that I'm a language tutor I see the same situation among British students. Teaching Latin would help slightly as they would be exposed to grammatical concepts like declension. There is almost no declension in English but it's very important in other languages. I regularly see anglophone students struggle with it in Russian.

    It could be fixed much more effectively by teaching Linguistics rather than Latin but that would not stimulate the desiccated G spots of Telegraph readers with type 2 diabetes in the same way so the tories won't do it.
    I wonder if the Latin is because its full of gender to troll the wokists?

    Also - because it gives those parents with money to send their brats to private schools an advantage? At the moment Latin can't seriously be used as an educational criterion. It's like an O level in sheep-farming - only the Welsh, etc., have a hope of doing it. But make it a general educational qualification ...

    Rachel Johnson (as in sister of ...) suggested rote learning of the classics was a soft route to Oxford.
    So why would Tories want more competition for their children's life chances?
    Tokenism. The Universities might dump the classics if it became obvious they are an upper middle class scam. You want a trickle of comp school entrants to point at and claim how inclusive it all is.
    There is not much to dump, the only universities which still do pure Classics/Latin degrees are Oxford and Cambridge, St Andrews, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Exeter and Nottingham, Manchester, Bristol, KCL and UCL and Royal Holloway.

    They are all pretty posh universities anyway
    So?

    If cutting the classics means an instant downwards improvement to the posho-meter reading , to help meet the targets mandated by government, they'll have to consider it very seriously.
    It is dumbing down and would make barely any difference whatsoever, as they are tiny courses anyway.

    We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care, we support selection on merit and high academic standards, hence Williamson is pushing Latin in state schools. So if they want to suck up to Williamson if anything universities will expand their classics courses and do state school outreach for them.

    Plus not all classics students will be privately educated and Oxbridge are 60% state school now anyway
    ‘Leading Tory says they “do not care” about state schools’

    You need to be more careful about your choice of words if you want to progress in politics
    What an absurd distortion of what I said.

    I did not once say 'I do not care about state schools', merely I want selection on merit. If anything I care more than Carnyx as like Williamson I want to spread Latin in our state schools and expand excellence in them (a few more grammars would help too).

    If you would prefer to keep excellence and Latin confined to your alma mater of Eton and a few top public schools and a conveyor belt to Oxbridge and the top professions like law and medicine and banking that is your affair
    “ We Tories are in power and in government and have set no state school target, we are not Labour and do not care”

    “We Tories… have set no state school target, we … do not care”

    Of course it’s absurd. But that’s a direct quote.

    It’s meant as friendly advice, so don’t get upset.
    Yes, the whole point of being a Tory is we don't believe in setting socialist style targets for state school admissions to leading universities like Oxbridge.

    We believe in treating private and state school applicants equally on merit. We do not care about equality of outcome and state school targets.
    '
    Otherwise what is the point in being a Tory? Your 'friendly advice' is to stop being a Tory as far as I can see
    The question is how you judge merit
    If one or one's ancestors have worked hard or smart enough to merit purchasing an expensive education for their offspring?
    Or stolen enough.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    Alice? Don't legitimate Johnson daughters have unusual, sometimes salad related names?
    Haven't looked into that. How do you mean salad related? Like, Cucumber or Cress?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,294
    Rugby isn’t my sport, but I’m struggling to work out the Lions’ game plan.
  • tlg86 said:

    Rugby isn’t my sport, but I’m struggling to work out the Lions’ game plan.

    Hoping the match is reffed competently.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 11,907
    kinabalu said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    Genderqueer, Moon Unit.
    You'd love to see it. That's a Zappa child, isn't it. Triggers memories of that album of his, Sheik Yerbouti.

    "Hey there people I'm Bobby Brown ..."

    What a song. What an LP in fact.
    I tell you people, I was not ready...
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,252
    pm215 said:

    dixiedean said:


    The Roman Army was hugely diverse. And intermarrying extensively.
    They didn't seem to make a big deal of skin colour. Or is that naive?

    If you are in the mood for some long blog posts on that topic by a Roman military historian, I can recommend Bret Devereaux's just finished 5-part series of posts on Roman identity and diversity. He gets into the skin colour question in particular in part 4. (The short answer seems to be that yes, you're right -- the Romans had their fair share of bigotry, but their dividing lines and the way they thought didn't line up with the modern racism-as-tied-into-skin-colour concept.)

    The whole blog is excellent, in fact; strongly recommended.


    That looks hugely interesting. Thanks.
  • Oh yes, The Hundred will be fan friendly.

    Fans have been banned from bringing alcohol into Lord’s for the remainder of The Hundred after crowd trouble at last week’s matches there forced the early closure of the ground’s bars.

    The stadium has also halved the number of alcoholic drinks an individual can buy at its own bars from four to two per transaction during Hundred games there and will now shut those bars halfway through men’s matches.

    The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the moves follow alcohol-fuelled crowd trouble during Thursday’s London Spirit games against Trent Rockets, which led to the ground’s bars being closed half an hour before the end of the men’s game.

    Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC) members will be exempt from the ban on bringing booze into Lord’s, which will also not apply to non-Hundred fixtures.

    The remaining Hundred fixtures at the ground are London Spirit’s matches against Southern Brave today [on Sunday] and against Northern Superchargers on Tuesday, as well as the final on August 21.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2021/07/31/lords-bans-fans-bringing-alcohol-hundred-matches-following-crowd/
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638
    My word 🤣


  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 17,808
    MattW said:

    Carnyx said:

    pigeon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    pigeon said:

    Leon said:

    The Olympics needs a dramatic new sport

    I reckon it is time to reintroduce pok-ta-pok: the Mesomaerican ball game (of the Maya, Aztecs, etc)

    It is simple but quite compelling. Two teams of maybe four players each compete on a hard stone ball-court, not unlike a real tennis court. With bats, arms and hips they propel a large, firm rubber ball at each other and also at a stone hoop placed high to the side. Victory is achieved via points, or by slotting the ball through the hoop.

    it's not a game for the faint hearted, however. For example, the ball is genuinely hard, and can cause severe bruising, internal injuries - even death in extreme cases. Also, at the end of the game the entire losing team is ritually sacrificed by decapitation, and after that they also sacrifice and dismember the entire winning team. And then the next teams play, for a while, with the severed heads and hands.

    So it might not be quite in tune with the Woke agenda in British Olympics, but on the other hand the inquest into TeamGB's performance would be rendered largely pointless, thus saving money?

    Perhaps just a tad severe...

    Chariot racing and horse archery are both ancient disciplines ripe for revival. In a previous thread I also invented elephant javelin, but the provision of the necessary animals could prove somewhat challenging. Horse javelin could still be fantastic though.

    Also, jousting.
    Horse archery is allegedly possible because at the gallop horses have all 4 feet of the ground at one stage, giving you the still platform you need for archery. Elephants don't gallop, making javelin chucking problematic.
    Elephants can get up a fair turn of speed, but yes, horses would be more practical.

    My conception of the mounted javelin event (as distinct from how they would actually have been used by skirmishers in ancient warfare) is as follows: rider charges down a runway as fast as possible, utilising the momentum of the animal to help launch the projectile. The skill, rather as with traditional javelin, is to hurl the implement along an optimal trajectory and with as much force as possible, without crossing the line at the end of the track.

    Co-ordinating the chucking of the spear and controlling the animal ought to make for a challenge and a spectacle!
    Yes but does it work on ice?! This is what the people (me) want to know.
    No problem. Make it elephant curling, and make the elephant hold the broom. Now that would be something to watch.
    Oh come on.

    If you have an elephant you should at least get the ice cleared by the competitor making the elephant sneeze with a supplied pot of pepper.
    The point is that the modification of the ice surface has to be done subtly. It is no accident that a Scot created the dynanical electromagnetic field theory.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,190
    edited July 2021
    Carnyx said:

    Further to this Latin business, I want to know -

    1. What will be deleted from the timetable to make room for it.
    2. Where the funds come from for a whole new subject field. Teachers cost. And they come in discrete lumps, not infinitely graduated sums.
    3. How far this is intended to save on expensive subjects such as science, home economics cookery labs (as e.g. debated on PB), music, PT etc. For Latin, one only needs a textbook/reader and primer for grammar such as Kennedy's. Not even a language laboratory. Who needs one for Latin? It's a dead language, unless one has the RC hierarchy in mind as a career choice, and that is Not The Right Kind of Catholic Church as opposed to the C of E, unless the latter is going all pre-Laudian. Or the Latin is needed for acolytes in some new form of spider sacrifice ritual I haven't yet learnt about on PB (eye opening as it has been today).
    4. How this is to be reconciled with the Conservative Government's drive to closing down non-STEM subjects in English universities ((c) Gove M., unless I misremember, inter aliis).

    Quicquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.

    [with minor edits to improve rhetoric and textual accuracy]

    No reason Latin cannot be studied alongside the other languages which are part of the curriculum.

    If you want to be a traditionalist pro Benedict XVI, Latin Mass conducting Roman Catholic priest or bishop or an Anglo Catholic C of E vicar, a knowledge of Latin would of course be pivotal to your role, as indeed would it be if you want to be a historian of ancient Rome or archaelogist.

    It is also often useful in law and medicine too and indeed knowledge of Latin and Greek and the classics even produces PMs like the current incumbent
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 1,616
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    MaxPB said:

    Bloody hell Boris is having another kid, how many is that? 8?

    Congratulations to Mrs and Mrs Johnson. Also, very sadly reporting a miscarriage earlier in the year.

    In addition to his timeless comedic genius it would appear he is something of a stud too.
    He's closing in on Mick Philpott.
    Now that made me laugh, but it really shouldn't.

    Comparing the greatest living English Prime Minister of American birth with a malign, good for nothing wastrel isn't really appropriate.
    Yes, sorry, I'm being a bit "edgy" today. What a moderate surprise, though. Another child for Boris and Carrie so hot on the heels of the first. I wonder whether it will be a boy or a girl and what they will call him/her? I say girl and Alice.
    Alice? Don't legitimate Johnson daughters have unusual, sometimes salad related names?
    Haven't looked into that. How do you mean salad related? Like, Cucumber or Cress?
    Cressida! In honour of everyone's favourite police officer.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,651
    Carnyx said:

    kinabalu said:

    Carnyx said:

    kinabalu said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    A final story about the Aztecs before I go to the gym


    At the height of their imperial might the Aztecs conquered a nearby kingdom and captured the rival king's daughter, ie the princess.

    As they were so triumphant the Aztecs decided to be magnanimous, and they invited the defeated king to a feast in Tenochtitlan, where he could be reunited with his kidnapped daughter

    When the defeated king sat down he finally saw his daughter again, or, rather, he saw an Aztec priest capering about while wearing, as a suit, the carefully flayed skin of his ritually slaughtered child

    The king was understandably anguished and outraged and left immediately.

    My favourite bit is this: the Aztecs were mystified by the king's reaction. To them, being killed and flayed and having your skin worn by an Aztec priest was an honour. They thought the girl's Dad would be HAPPY

    You sure this isn't a chapter you've just read in Game of Thrones?
    Amazingly no. That’s what I ‘love’ about Mesoamerican cultures. The most insane stories are generally true

    Historians get the same surprises. Eg For a long time the mad acts depicted, notoriously, on Moche pottery, were regarded as fantasies in ceramics

    Here’s a couple of photos I took of some of the tamer Moche pots in the wonderful Larco museum in Lima. They used to hide these from the public as being too upsetting





    It puts our own arguments about the cruel use of the wrong pronouns in a new perspective
    That's a bizarre use of the cruel adverb and an even more bizarre argument.

    Just because heathen ancestors committed cruel and gross acts doesn't mean they can be used to deprecate contemporary sensibilities.
    What I love is the Guardian critic's view is this a philosphical viewpoint that is valuable.
    Yes, calling the Aztecs ‘valuable early thinkers’ is like calling Hitler a ‘valuable early car designer’
    Point of order. The Fuehrer did not design the KdF-wagen. He was the facilitator, commissioner, etc. Herr Dr Porsche led the design team. Producer and director, if you like.
    Adolf Hitler similar to Boris Johnson (on the vaccine) then in this regard? Would that be fair?
    On second thoughts:

    The Fuehrer had a clear vision of a modern Germany with Autobahnen (also convenient for internal LOC for switching fronts). So, as well as an Organization Todt to build the aforesaid A-bahnen, the approved members of the German Volk needed a nice cheap(ish) car to be part of the Volk community and go out for approved Volkish outings. And a motor industry to stimulate to provide factories which could be used to motorise the Wehrmacht (as, indeed, happened to the Vokswagen factory when the lines were switched from KdF-Wagen to Kuebelwagen and Schwimmwagen for the war effort - hence, IIRC. the raised suspension later used on the VW Bus).

    You can draw your own comparison of Mr Johnson's clarity of overarching vision and consistency in pursuing his own aims.
    Interesting. So I'd say our man has rather less grip. But I guess that's enough 'Hitler better than Johnson' talk. We'll get ourselves banned and that would be a complete travesty.
    And that's before we start talking about their respective visions for long distance high speed railways. The Fuehrer was channelling I. K. Brunel a lot more than you know who. Not that the Breitspurbahn ever got built, never mind running.
    Boris Island never got built either. Or various other "B" things. So perhaps a case of 'more that unites'.
This discussion has been closed.