Howdy, Stranger!

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

If Johnson wants a sacrificial lamb Raab looks the best choice – politicalbetting.com

123468

Comments

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Scott_xP said:

    DavidL said:

    is the FS really supposed to be on duty 52 weeks a year just in case?

    No wonder only buffoons and idiots want to go into politics these days.

    One would expect the FS to be smart enough to read a calendar
    Really? In the case of Dominic ‘I didn’t know there was so much trade by lorry’ Raab I wouldn’t have put money on it.

    Still, could be worse. Imagine if Williamson, who literally cannot read a calendar (as he proved with his mathematically impossible school term/holiday plans) is reshuffled to replace him.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821

    MaxPB said:

    What I'm still not clear on about the supposed (and real) lack of UK government strategy on Afghanistan - what exactly were the critics such as Theresa May expecting? That Dominic Raab and Boris would snap their fingers and miraculously transport 50k troops to Kabul to keep hold of the country while we resettled millions of people to other parts of the world? These MPs have been overseeing a huge drop in military spending so we can spunk the cash on buying votes from old people and now they're bitching about it.

    Yeah, the reality is that the UK didn't have any room to do anything much. This is a Biden disaster, following on from the Trump surrender.
    What the UK should/could have done is influence the US. Remember George Bush Snr and Margaret Thatcher over Gulf War one? The big problem is Biden thinks our PM is a first rate cretin and on that subject he is completely right. Biden has been completely wrong headed on Afghanistan on the other hand. It is an absolute outrage, and a great sadness that we have an clown of a PM who was unable to make him see sense.
    A genuine question

    Do you really think that any UK PM could have done anything to stop Biden's action who was enacting Trump's policy
    That's a very good question, but who knows what the answer is? I suspect not, but maybe we could, in collaboration with European allies and Australia, have at least ameliorated things so that it wasn't quite as chaotic, if we'd had a serious PM and Foreign Secretary in a government which hadn't blown up relations with virtually all of our international partners.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    Woke means narcissistic privileged middle class twats who are overly obsessed with perceived oppressions in the West in a way which, they think, makes them look extra caring and aware, but which makes everyone else privately puke and/or laugh in derision. There you go
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    edited August 2021
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58271911

    As I was saying earlier today. The politicians will overrule the JCVI. There's no way they risk another cancellation of Christmas like last year. We have the vaccines, what's the point in not using them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    MaxPB said:

    What I'm still not clear on about the supposed (and real) lack of UK government strategy on Afghanistan - what exactly were the critics such as Theresa May expecting? That Dominic Raab and Boris would snap their fingers and miraculously transport 50k troops to Kabul to keep hold of the country while we resettled millions of people to other parts of the world? These MPs have been overseeing a huge drop in military spending so we can spunk the cash on buying votes from old people and now they're bitching about it.

    Yeah, the reality is that the UK didn't have any room to do anything much. This is a Biden disaster, following on from the Trump surrender.
    What the UK should/could have done is influence the US. Remember George Bush Snr and Margaret Thatcher over Gulf War one? The big problem is Biden thinks our PM is a first rate cretin and on that subject he is completely right. Biden has been completely wrong headed on Afghanistan on the other hand. It is an absolute outrage, and a great sadness that we have an clown of a PM who was unable to make him see sense.
    A genuine question

    Do you really think that any UK PM could have done anything to stop Biden's action who was enacting Trump's policy
    That's a very good question, but who knows what the answer is? I suspect not, but maybe we could, in collaboration with European allies and Australia, have at least ameliorated things so that it wasn't quite as chaotic, if we'd had a serious PM and Foreign Secretary in a government which hadn't blown up relations with virtually all of our international partners.
    I defer to nobody in my disdain for Johnson and Raab.

    But after Trump had signed that treaty, the answer was unfortunately ‘no.’

    Just as Biden seems to grasp, although he delayed final withdrawal, he couldn’t really put things into reverse.

    Whether withdrawal was right or wrong in principle is another question.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Taz said:

    MaxPB said:

    What I'm still not clear on about the supposed (and real) lack of UK government strategy on Afghanistan - what exactly were the critics such as Theresa May expecting? That Dominic Raab and Boris would snap their finger and miraculously transport 50k troops to Kabul to keep hold of the country while we resettled millions of people to other parts of the world? These MPs have been overseeing a huge drop in military spending so we can spunk the cash on buying votes from old people and now they're bitching about it.

    Paraphrasing Theresa May: "What does it say about us if Boris Johnson is Prime Minister and not me?"
    From the ridiculous to the even more ridiculous ?
    From the subpar to the ridiculous!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    Woke means narcissistic privileged middle class twats who are overly obsessed with perceived oppressions in the West in a way which, they think, makes them look extra caring and aware, but which makes everyone else privately puke and/or laugh in derision. There you go
    Doesn’t that make you ‘woke?’
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,317

    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    edited August 2021
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:


    They sure do. And it leads to some bizarre takes. Eg that America is pulling out of Afghanistan because woke liberals are obsessed with personal pronouns and don't give a shit about women being oppressed under Islam.

    There's nothing bizarre about pointing out the howling disconnect between the 'woke' liberals' obsession with invented trivia and their profound uninterest in the reality of what oppression of women really comprises.
    America has not pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home.

    And where's the evidence that liberals in the US are less interested than Conservatives (trad or MAGA) in female emancipation in other countries?
    Where did I say they were less interested? I said they were obsessed with invented trivia (nonsense about pronouns etc), and profoundly uninterested in real oppression. You're not seriously going to disagree with this, are you?

    Nor did I say that America pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home. You're inventing straw men.
    He can’t disagree with you, because what you say is painfully and obviously true, but he can’t admit you’re right, because it’s a religion with him, so he invents not just a straw man, but a total Worzel fucking Gummage of gibberish

    @kinabalu is intrinsically risible. I’d miss his lunacies if he ever actually opened his mind and raised his IQ over 100.04
    Or does the laugh-a-minute lunacy come more from the unHerd drivel pipe that thinks the moral fibre of the West is being sapped by "wokeness" such that it can no longer stand up and fight the enemy like a MAN?
    Was that an attempt at humour? Be honest, it was, wasn’t it? You actually and rather bravely did an attempted funniness. It’s honestly touching, like the doomed alpaca of PB comments
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    MattW said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Fishing said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    This is jaw dropping. The goings on at Chelsea FC youth team in the 90s.

    “ This is a tough read (be warned).

    The court documents, obtained by @TheAthleticUK, about culture of ‘racist bullying’ at Chelsea in the 1990s.

    One coach, Graham Rix, accused of throwing scalding coffee over the head of a black youth-team player.”

    https://twitter.com/dtathletic/status/1428250498465927168?s=21

    Graham Rix, the man who got done for under aged sex. Blow me down with a feather.
    I just can’t get my head round how uncouth and nasty they were. What the coaches are accused of saying is what I am guessing people anonymously post on social media nowadays when black players miss penalties or make mistakes etc - amazing to think they thought they could get away with it, if true of course.
    It might be amazing nowadays but in the 80s or early 90s (and probably before but I wouldnt know) a lot of the areas dominated by young men were like that. Bullying, violence or racism wouldnt have been at all unusual in the army, police, football or rugby. Not necessarily expected, but not surprising at the time either.
    My first job was as a runner at the LIFFE floor in the mid 90s. 3000 people there and probably 2975 were white. But almost all the cleaners were black and I was never comfortable with it. I remember seeing one bloke throw some food in the floor in the canteen just so the cleaner would pick it up. Coming from Essex and working there/Romford market, playing Sunday football, I heard millions of racist comments and jokes, but never really brutal, face to face, what I’d call Deep South style hatred, like that.
    The City was bad in my day too. The sexism was what I noticed most. I would hope that the sort of stuff that was routine then wouldn't be tolerated now.

    "Oh fuck, that's wrong, gonna call Seddlements."

    Fiona picks up. "Yep."

    "Hey juicytits, can you be an angel and cancel a trade for me."

    "I can cancel something, Darren, yes. Be delighted to."

    She hangs up and calls HR.
    I had a job in the City in the mid-90s. There were 6 men and two women on a trading/analysis desk at a large investment bank. I don't remember a single sexist comment all the time I was there, either by the standards of the time or by today's incredibly sensitive standards. But maybe I was just using the bathroom or doing the photocopying every time they were made.
    Yep, about that period. So either you dropped into a bubble of woke - ahead of its time - or something about your presence deterred any nonsense. Either way being terrific news.
    A lot of things have been the equivalent of Woke for a very long time. For example, BBC TV and radio presentation/continuity have been at present day levels of Wokeness since about 1990. (Not making a partisan point, just an observation).
    What about Dave Lee Travis, aka the Hairy Cornflake? He wasn't very woke.
    DLT resigned from Radio 1 in 1993 when Matthew Bannister was purging old people.
    He did. A great loss. :smile:
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,149
    edited August 2021
    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    People have provided their own definitions multiple times in the past. However each time the debate comes up again someone then pretends they cannot even possibly imagine what someone might mean when they use the term pejoratively, sometimes throwing in a 'who could be against being 'awake' to issues?' sarcasm, as if no one has ever sought to explain that stance, or as in this case suggest it is about reluctance. We'd never get everywhere if we sought to extract definitions of what ever individual means when they use a particular term, not least ones such as liberal/conservative/socialist, let alone ones like woke.

    People don't agree on what woke means, I say just leave it at that, I think we have enough of a flavour of what people think the term means without precise definition - I dare say people for whom it is a positive don't agree on its definition, since you think it has broadened to include recognition of other injustices yet someone else may think you unwoke by not broadening to enough injustices. Likewise some think it negative, but others take it much too far in my opinion (when anything negative is 'woke')
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,250

    isam said:

    Most sensible people know us being in Afghanistan was an impossible situation, and it seems even less possible to definitively apportion the blame for what has gone on.

    I suppose Labour have to act outraged about everything, scoring political points is what they need to do to win power.

    Trump’s take on events seems crazy given he wanted troops out earlier. Biden could have scrapped Trump’s plans of he’d wanted to. Blair could have not gone in. Brown, Cameron & May could have taken us out. Hard to see what Boris could have done differently, given we are pegged to the decisions of the US.

    My own view is we shouldn’t meddle in these matters anyway. Not Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, anywhere, unless they’re bombing us. Be pacifists. But I suppose it’s not as easy as that either

    The world is a battle of ideas. China's way. The West's way. The Theocrats' way. The Globalists' way. The authoritarians' way.

    If you believe in something you will argue for it, live by its tenets and back that up with force if necessary.

    We may argue for our Western way, but we have not lived by it in recent times , don't intend to in the future and have no stomach for a fight.
    Having listened to the Parliametary debate, I heard very
    isam said:
    Is the rest of the programme worth a listen?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    MaxPB said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58271911

    As I was saying earlier today. The politicians will overrule the JCVI. There's no way they risk another cancellation of Christmas like last year. We have the vaccines, what's the point in not using them.

    You’re good at this stuff Max. Why is the JCVI coming out with this weird bollocks?

    It seems obviously nonsense to me. We have the jabs, there’s no evidence 3rd jabs will do any harm, and mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial

    Are they on drugs or what?
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 757
    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    No. The usage I'm familiar with includes trans rights, feminism and other -isms. I'd say it's something to do with broadly believing in lots of rights for minority groups, which I agree with, but without the acknowledgement that groups conflict, and rights conflict. So, should there be women-only spaces? Can western europe ban the Burkha? And so on.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    edited August 2021
    darkage said:

    kinabalu said:

    darkage said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Fishing said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    This is jaw dropping. The goings on at Chelsea FC youth team in the 90s.

    “ This is a tough read (be warned).

    The court documents, obtained by @TheAthleticUK, about culture of ‘racist bullying’ at Chelsea in the 1990s.

    One coach, Graham Rix, accused of throwing scalding coffee over the head of a black youth-team player.”

    https://twitter.com/dtathletic/status/1428250498465927168?s=21

    Graham Rix, the man who got done for under aged sex. Blow me down with a feather.
    I just can’t get my head round how uncouth and nasty they were. What the coaches are accused of saying is what I am guessing people anonymously post on social media nowadays when black players miss penalties or make mistakes etc - amazing to think they thought they could get away with it, if true of course.
    It might be amazing nowadays but in the 80s or early 90s (and probably before but I wouldnt know) a lot of the areas dominated by young men were like that. Bullying, violence or racism wouldnt have been at all unusual in the army, police, football or rugby. Not necessarily expected, but not surprising at the time either.
    My first job was as a runner at the LIFFE floor in the mid 90s. 3000 people there and probably 2975 were white. But almost all the cleaners were black and I was never comfortable with it. I remember seeing one bloke throw some food in the floor in the canteen just so the cleaner would pick it up. Coming from Essex and working there/Romford market, playing Sunday football, I heard millions of racist comments and jokes, but never really brutal, face to face, what I’d call Deep South style hatred, like that.
    The City was bad in my day too. The sexism was what I noticed most. I would hope that the sort of stuff that was routine then wouldn't be tolerated now.

    "Oh fuck, that's wrong, gonna call Seddlements."

    Fiona picks up. "Yep."

    "Hey juicytits, can you be an angel and cancel a trade for me."

    "I can cancel something, Darren, yes. Be delighted to."

    She hangs up and calls HR.
    I had a job in the City in the mid-90s. There were 6 men and two women on a trading/analysis desk at a large investment bank. I don't remember a single sexist comment all the time I was there, either by the standards of the time or by today's incredibly sensitive standards. But maybe I was just using the bathroom or doing the photocopying every time they were made.
    Yep, about that period. So either you dropped into a bubble of woke - ahead of its time - or something about your presence deterred any nonsense. Either way being terrific news.
    Hm. I think one of the reasons I am so averse to woke is that I have so, so rarely come across situations in which woke might be called for. In my whole adult life, I can count on the fingers of one hand people like the above who have treated women and/or minorities like that. It's not that I'm blind to it - on the few occasions in which I've seen it it's grated horribly. But I just don't see this ocean of racism and sexism which woke is supposed to solve. Perhaps it is because I only hang around with nice people.
    I started my career in the 00's and came across pretty bad sexism in a medium sized extremely successful private sector firm. It was just continuous derogatory comments by men about women, typically about their appearance, and not taking them seriously. The women they generally hired were young (ie after university, pre marriage and childbirth) and very attractive, and there was a degree of expectation that they would use this to their advantage in the organisation and their dealings with external clients. The women they hired never seriously tackled the men on this outrageous and blatant sexism, they seemed happy to effectively play the game, obtaining large pay rises and massive pay offs to avoid going to an employment tribunal. In one particularly memorable case a girl was told to use her massive bonus to get a boob job. She did not get a boob job but used the money for a deposit on a flat and still works for the company.
    That's a good example of the patriarchy in action. Female power derived from and beholden unto men - ie essentially illusory.
    BUT - the women could just leave and go and work for another firm - there were other firms in the industry that were run by women and employed almost entirely women. I am convinced that the whole thing was a voluntary arrangement. (I got out of it myself pretty quickly)
    Voluntary in the micro and literal sense that no-one was explicitly forcing those individuals, yes. But indicative of a macro where female power is secondary to male and derived from it. Similar to the "casting couch" in the movie industry. Some individual women profited from that too. Does this show it wasn't essentially about male power? No it does not.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    MaxPB said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58271911

    As I was saying earlier today. The politicians will overrule the JCVI. There's no way they risk another cancellation of Christmas like last year. We have the vaccines, what's the point in not using them.

    The overarching goal should be to avoid any more lockdowns and restrictions. If boosters have even a marginal effect on ‘cases’ that prevents the usual suspects from piping up, we should have boosters.



  • TazTaz Posts: 14,426
    isam said:

    Taz said:

    MaxPB said:

    What I'm still not clear on about the supposed (and real) lack of UK government strategy on Afghanistan - what exactly were the critics such as Theresa May expecting? That Dominic Raab and Boris would snap their finger and miraculously transport 50k troops to Kabul to keep hold of the country while we resettled millions of people to other parts of the world? These MPs have been overseeing a huge drop in military spending so we can spunk the cash on buying votes from old people and now they're bitching about it.

    Paraphrasing Theresa May: "What does it say about us if Boris Johnson is Prime Minister and not me?"
    From the ridiculous to the even more ridiculous ?
    From the subpar to the ridiculous!
    Terrific, I’m tempted to pinch that.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58271911

    As I was saying earlier today. The politicians will overrule the JCVI. There's no way they risk another cancellation of Christmas like last year. We have the vaccines, what's the point in not using them.

    You’re good at this stuff Max. Why is the JCVI coming out with this weird bollocks?

    It seems obviously nonsense to me. We have the jabs, there’s no evidence 3rd jabs will do any harm, and mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial

    Are they on drugs or what?
    Honestly I'm not sure. The stance should be "as many vaccines as it takes" to beat it. For some reason they're bollocksing around suggesting it might be dangerous for under 18s but then not, third doses may not be required but we all know they're going to happen. I don't get it at all.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,149
    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Taz said:

    isam said:

    Taz said:

    MaxPB said:

    What I'm still not clear on about the supposed (and real) lack of UK government strategy on Afghanistan - what exactly were the critics such as Theresa May expecting? That Dominic Raab and Boris would snap their finger and miraculously transport 50k troops to Kabul to keep hold of the country while we resettled millions of people to other parts of the world? These MPs have been overseeing a huge drop in military spending so we can spunk the cash on buying votes from old people and now they're bitching about it.

    Paraphrasing Theresa May: "What does it say about us if Boris Johnson is Prime Minister and not me?"
    From the ridiculous to the even more ridiculous ?
    From the subpar to the ridiculous!
    Terrific, I’m tempted to pinch that.
    Thanks 😊
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,426
    MattW said:

    isam said:

    Most sensible people know us being in Afghanistan was an impossible situation, and it seems even less possible to definitively apportion the blame for what has gone on.

    I suppose Labour have to act outraged about everything, scoring political points is what they need to do to win power.

    Trump’s take on events seems crazy given he wanted troops out earlier. Biden could have scrapped Trump’s plans of he’d wanted to. Blair could have not gone in. Brown, Cameron & May could have taken us out. Hard to see what Boris could have done differently, given we are pegged to the decisions of the US.

    My own view is we shouldn’t meddle in these matters anyway. Not Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, anywhere, unless they’re bombing us. Be pacifists. But I suppose it’s not as easy as that either

    The world is a battle of ideas. China's way. The West's way. The Theocrats' way. The Globalists' way. The authoritarians' way.

    If you believe in something you will argue for it, live by its tenets and back that up with force if necessary.

    We may argue for our Western way, but we have not lived by it in recent times , don't intend to in the future and have no stomach for a fight.
    Having listened to the Parliametary debate, I heard very
    isam said:
    Is the rest of the programme worth a listen?
    Not really. I found it quite mediocre and didn’t really like it at the end where Lisa Nandy was shouting over an Afghan journalist who dared to go off message. Still, a great metaphor. Arrogant westerners talking over and talking for the locals.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    People have provided their own definitions multiple times in the past. However each time the debate comes up again someone then pretends they cannot even possibly imagine what someone might mean when they use the term pejoratively, sometimes throwing in a 'who could be against being 'awake' to issues?' sarcasm, as if no one has ever sought to explain that stance, or as in this case suggest it is about reluctance. We'd never get everywhere if we sought to extract definitions of what ever individual means when they use a particular term, not least ones such as liberal/conservative/socialist, let alone ones like woke.

    People don't agree on what woke means, I say just leave it at that, I think we have enough of a flavour of what people think the term means without precise definition - I dare say people for whom it is a positive don't agree on its definition, since you think it has broadened to include recognition of other injustices yet someone else may think you unwoke by not broadening to enough injustices. Likewise some think it negative, but others take it much too far in my opinion (when anything negative is 'woke')
    To be a bit more serious, “Fascism” is an interesting comparator. It’s a word which the Left slings around a lot, even after much satire (recall The Young Ones and “Fascist!” as the constant left wing whine from Rik Mayall - an early Wokester character, looking back).

    But what does it mean? It is not like “Marxist” or “communist” where there are actual founding texts you can refer to (as you can, also, with most religions). Even “capitalist” is better defined, see Adam Smith and so on

    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Real Fascism is quite hard to find these days - except in Islam, where it flourishes. ISIS and Taliban are pure Fascism
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    People often have different takes on the meaning of words so it is often a good idea to agree the meaning of a shared vocabulary when discussing contentious topics. It is clear to me that as the word Woke is actually widely used that definition is inaccurate.
    Please provide your definition.

    I believe the correct definition is that someone is 'Woke' if they believe @Foxy's definition of 'Woke' is right.
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:


    They sure do. And it leads to some bizarre takes. Eg that America is pulling out of Afghanistan because woke liberals are obsessed with personal pronouns and don't give a shit about women being oppressed under Islam.

    There's nothing bizarre about pointing out the howling disconnect between the 'woke' liberals' obsession with invented trivia and their profound uninterest in the reality of what oppression of women really comprises.
    America has not pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home.

    And where's the evidence that liberals in the US are less interested than Conservatives (trad or MAGA) in female emancipation in other countries?
    You’re so fucking dumb
    I'm noticing a tendency to lash out.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Andy_JS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Fishing said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    This is jaw dropping. The goings on at Chelsea FC youth team in the 90s.

    “ This is a tough read (be warned).

    The court documents, obtained by @TheAthleticUK, about culture of ‘racist bullying’ at Chelsea in the 1990s.

    One coach, Graham Rix, accused of throwing scalding coffee over the head of a black youth-team player.”

    https://twitter.com/dtathletic/status/1428250498465927168?s=21

    Graham Rix, the man who got done for under aged sex. Blow me down with a feather.
    I just can’t get my head round how uncouth and nasty they were. What the coaches are accused of saying is what I am guessing people anonymously post on social media nowadays when black players miss penalties or make mistakes etc - amazing to think they thought they could get away with it, if true of course.
    It might be amazing nowadays but in the 80s or early 90s (and probably before but I wouldnt know) a lot of the areas dominated by young men were like that. Bullying, violence or racism wouldnt have been at all unusual in the army, police, football or rugby. Not necessarily expected, but not surprising at the time either.
    My first job was as a runner at the LIFFE floor in the mid 90s. 3000 people there and probably 2975 were white. But almost all the cleaners were black and I was never comfortable with it. I remember seeing one bloke throw some food in the floor in the canteen just so the cleaner would pick it up. Coming from Essex and working there/Romford market, playing Sunday football, I heard millions of racist comments and jokes, but never really brutal, face to face, what I’d call Deep South style hatred, like that.
    The City was bad in my day too. The sexism was what I noticed most. I would hope that the sort of stuff that was routine then wouldn't be tolerated now.

    "Oh fuck, that's wrong, gonna call Seddlements."

    Fiona picks up. "Yep."

    "Hey juicytits, can you be an angel and cancel a trade for me."

    "I can cancel something, Darren, yes. Be delighted to."

    She hangs up and calls HR.
    I had a job in the City in the mid-90s. There were 6 men and two women on a trading/analysis desk at a large investment bank. I don't remember a single sexist comment all the time I was there, either by the standards of the time or by today's incredibly sensitive standards. But maybe I was just using the bathroom or doing the photocopying every time they were made.
    Yep, about that period. So either you dropped into a bubble of woke - ahead of its time - or something about your presence deterred any nonsense. Either way being terrific news.
    A lot of things have been the equivalent of Woke for a very long time. For example, BBC TV and radio presentation/continuity have been at present day levels of Wokeness since about 1990. (Not making a partisan point, just an observation).
    What about Dave Lee Travis, aka the Hairy Cornflake? He wasn't very woke.
    The Hairy Cornflake last presented Top of the Pops in 1984.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/totp2/trivia/presenters/list5.shtml
    Yep. But he kept on rocking the nation on Radio 1 until 1993.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    People have provided their own definitions multiple times in the past. However each time the debate comes up again someone then pretends they cannot even possibly imagine what someone might mean when they use the term pejoratively, sometimes throwing in a 'who could be against being 'awake' to issues?' sarcasm, as if no one has ever sought to explain that stance, or as in this case suggest it is about reluctance. We'd never get everywhere if we sought to extract definitions of what ever individual means when they use a particular term, not least ones such as liberal/conservative/socialist, let alone ones like woke.

    People don't agree on what woke means, I say just leave it at that, I think we have enough of a flavour of what people think the term means without precise definition - I dare say people for whom it is a positive don't agree on its definition, since you think it has broadened to include recognition of other injustices yet someone else may think you unwoke by not broadening to enough injustices. Likewise some think it negative, but others take it much too far in my opinion (when anything negative is 'woke')
    To be a bit more serious, “Fascism” is an interesting comparator. It’s a word which the Left slings around a lot, even after much satire (recall The Young Ones and “Fascist!” as the constant left wing whine from Rik Mayall - an early Wokester character, looking back).

    But what does it mean? It is not like “Marxist” or “communist” where there are actual founding texts you can refer to (as you can, also, with most religions). Even “capitalist” is better defined, see Adam Smith and so on

    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Real Fascism is quite hard to find these days - except in Islam, where it flourishes. ISIS and Taliban are pure Fascism
    Strictly speaking, a fascist is somebody who follows the ideas of D’Annunzio as interpreted by Mussolini.

    But it tends to be interpreted rather more widely than that. For example, Horthy is now frequently called a fascist, even though the term didn’t exist when he deposed Bela Kun.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,149
    Think you have problems? Try dealing with a state that thinks you are dead

    If you are dead, you cannot own land. It's a fact that has led to innumerable cases in India of people being registered dead and dispossessed of their property - and many have discovered that there is very little they can do about it, writes the BBC's Chloe Hadjimatheou.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-58259497

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Booster update. Spoke to our GP this afternoon. We have flu jab appts booked for early November. These will also be covid booster events the GP said, for ones who are classed as vulnerable, he "hopes". He is awaiting further instruction.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    Evening all :)

    Norway votes on September 13th.

    The latest Respons poll as follows - changes from the last election in 2017:

    Labour Party: 25% (-2.5)
    Conservative Party: 20% (-5)
    Progress Party: 12% (-3)
    Centre Party: 11% (+1)
    Socialist Left: 10% (+4)
    Greens: 6% (+3)
    Red Party: 5% (+2.5)
    Liberal Party: 5% (+0.5)
    Christian People's Party: 4% (nc)

    The big move in this poll has been a fall back for the Centre Party and growing support for the Socialist Left and the Red Party along with the Greens.

    The current centre-right coalition led by the Conservatives looks in real trouble with Labour, Centre and Socialist Left perhaps in a position to form a new Red-Green coalition (the colour of the Centre Party is green symbolising their roots as an agricultural workers' party).
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58271911

    As I was saying earlier today. The politicians will overrule the JCVI. There's no way they risk another cancellation of Christmas like last year. We have the vaccines, what's the point in not using them.

    You’re good at this stuff Max. Why is the JCVI coming out with this weird bollocks?

    It seems obviously nonsense to me. We have the jabs, there’s no evidence 3rd jabs will do any harm, and mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial

    Are they on drugs or what?
    Honestly I'm not sure. The stance should be "as many vaccines as it takes" to beat it. For some reason they're bollocksing around suggesting it might be dangerous for under 18s but then not, third doses may not be required but we all know they're going to happen. I don't get it at all.
    "mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial"

    Presumably the JCVI are looking at precisely that. Is there enough science to justify the boost?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:


    They sure do. And it leads to some bizarre takes. Eg that America is pulling out of Afghanistan because woke liberals are obsessed with personal pronouns and don't give a shit about women being oppressed under Islam.

    There's nothing bizarre about pointing out the howling disconnect between the 'woke' liberals' obsession with invented trivia and their profound uninterest in the reality of what oppression of women really comprises.
    America has not pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home.

    And where's the evidence that liberals in the US are less interested than Conservatives (trad or MAGA) in female emancipation in other countries?
    Where did I say they were less interested? I said they were obsessed with invented trivia (nonsense about pronouns etc), and profoundly uninterested in real oppression. You're not seriously going to disagree with this, are you?

    Nor did I say that America pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home. You're inventing straw men.
    He can’t disagree with you, because what you say is painfully and obviously true, but he can’t admit you’re right, because it’s a religion with him, so he invents not just a straw man, but a total Worzel fucking Gummage of gibberish

    @kinabalu is intrinsically risible. I’d miss his lunacies if he ever actually opened his mind and raised his IQ over 100.04
    Or does the laugh-a-minute lunacy come more from the unHerd drivel pipe that thinks the moral fibre of the West is being sapped by "wokeness" such that it can no longer stand up and fight the enemy like a MAN?
    Was that an attempt at humour? Be honest, it was, wasn’t it? You actually and rather bravely did an attempted funniness. It’s honestly touching, like the doomed alpaca of PB comments
    No, it wasn't. I genuinely think you're a dim narcissistic wanker. You're a cliche. It's only your vocab and travel budget that keeps your head above the water.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    People have provided their own definitions multiple times in the past. However each time the debate comes up again someone then pretends they cannot even possibly imagine what someone might mean when they use the term pejoratively, sometimes throwing in a 'who could be against being 'awake' to issues?' sarcasm, as if no one has ever sought to explain that stance, or as in this case suggest it is about reluctance. We'd never get everywhere if we sought to extract definitions of what ever individual means when they use a particular term, not least ones such as liberal/conservative/socialist, let alone ones like woke.

    People don't agree on what woke means, I say just leave it at that, I think we have enough of a flavour of what people think the term means without precise definition - I dare say people for whom it is a positive don't agree on its definition, since you think it has broadened to include recognition of other injustices yet someone else may think you unwoke by not broadening to enough injustices. Likewise some think it negative, but others take it much too far in my opinion (when anything negative is 'woke')
    To be a bit more serious, “Fascism” is an interesting comparator. It’s a word which the Left slings around a lot, even after much satire (recall The Young Ones and “Fascist!” as the constant left wing whine from Rik Mayall - an early Wokester character, looking back).

    But what does it mean? It is not like “Marxist” or “communist” where there are actual founding texts you can refer to (as you can, also, with most religions). Even “capitalist” is better defined, see Adam Smith and so on

    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Real Fascism is quite hard to find these days - except in Islam, where it flourishes. ISIS and Taliban are pure Fascism
    Strictly speaking, a fascist is somebody who follows the ideas of D’Annunzio as interpreted by Mussolini.

    But it tends to be interpreted rather more widely than that. For example, Horthy is now frequently called a fascist, even though the term didn’t exist when he deposed Bela Kun.
    I’m not sure of your *strict definition*.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    “Fascism's origins are complex and include many seemingly contradictory viewpoints, ultimately centered around a mythos of national rebirth from decadence.[57] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who drew upon both left-wing organizational tactics and right-wing political views.[58] Italian Fascism gravitated to the right in the early 1920s.[59][60] A major element of fascist ideology that has been deemed to be far right is its stated goal to promote the right of a supposedly superior people to dominate, while purging society of supposedly inferior elements.[61]”

    As Wiki says, Fascism is famously hard to define. “Like nailing jelly to the wall”
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Fishing said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    This is jaw dropping. The goings on at Chelsea FC youth team in the 90s.

    “ This is a tough read (be warned).

    The court documents, obtained by @TheAthleticUK, about culture of ‘racist bullying’ at Chelsea in the 1990s.

    One coach, Graham Rix, accused of throwing scalding coffee over the head of a black youth-team player.”

    https://twitter.com/dtathletic/status/1428250498465927168?s=21

    Graham Rix, the man who got done for under aged sex. Blow me down with a feather.
    I just can’t get my head round how uncouth and nasty they were. What the coaches are accused of saying is what I am guessing people anonymously post on social media nowadays when black players miss penalties or make mistakes etc - amazing to think they thought they could get away with it, if true of course.
    It might be amazing nowadays but in the 80s or early 90s (and probably before but I wouldnt know) a lot of the areas dominated by young men were like that. Bullying, violence or racism wouldnt have been at all unusual in the army, police, football or rugby. Not necessarily expected, but not surprising at the time either.
    My first job was as a runner at the LIFFE floor in the mid 90s. 3000 people there and probably 2975 were white. But almost all the cleaners were black and I was never comfortable with it. I remember seeing one bloke throw some food in the floor in the canteen just so the cleaner would pick it up. Coming from Essex and working there/Romford market, playing Sunday football, I heard millions of racist comments and jokes, but never really brutal, face to face, what I’d call Deep South style hatred, like that.
    The City was bad in my day too. The sexism was what I noticed most. I would hope that the sort of stuff that was routine then wouldn't be tolerated now.

    "Oh fuck, that's wrong, gonna call Seddlements."

    Fiona picks up. "Yep."

    "Hey juicytits, can you be an angel and cancel a trade for me."

    "I can cancel something, Darren, yes. Be delighted to."

    She hangs up and calls HR.
    I had a job in the City in the mid-90s. There were 6 men and two women on a trading/analysis desk at a large investment bank. I don't remember a single sexist comment all the time I was there, either by the standards of the time or by today's incredibly sensitive standards. But maybe I was just using the bathroom or doing the photocopying every time they were made.
    Yep, about that period. So either you dropped into a bubble of woke - ahead of its time - or something about your presence deterred any nonsense. Either way being terrific news.
    A lot of things have been the equivalent of Woke for a very long time. For example, BBC TV and radio presentation/continuity have been at present day levels of Wokeness since about 1990. (Not making a partisan point, just an observation).
    What about Dave Lee Travis, aka the Hairy Cornflake? He wasn't very woke.
    What about Mike Read too.Darling of UKIP and writer of the hilariously unwoke Brexit Calypso ( it might be called something else, I don't really care- it was rubbish anyway)

    Oh wait... didn't Mike Read cancel Relax, because it was an anthem celebrating gay sex?

    The BBC, the last bastion of the socialist rascal, like Guto Harri, or Clarence Mitchell, or BBC Wales and Boris Johnson event MC, Wynne Evans. Although Harri is probably not a great example, having just been cancelled for wokeness by GB News.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58271911

    As I was saying earlier today. The politicians will overrule the JCVI. There's no way they risk another cancellation of Christmas like last year. We have the vaccines, what's the point in not using them.

    You’re good at this stuff Max. Why is the JCVI coming out with this weird bollocks?

    It seems obviously nonsense to me. We have the jabs, there’s no evidence 3rd jabs will do any harm, and mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial

    Are they on drugs or what?
    Honestly I'm not sure. The stance should be "as many vaccines as it takes" to beat it. For some reason they're bollocksing around suggesting it might be dangerous for under 18s but then not, third doses may not be required but we all know they're going to happen. I don't get it at all.
    "mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial"

    Presumably the JCVI are looking at precisely that. Is there enough science to justify the boost?
    It doesn't matter if there is or isn't, the side effect risk of vaccines is extremely low and we've bought the vaccines. Frankly, not doing them us a huge public health risk. I don't understand what kind of inputs the JCVI are looking at and once again we're left with an opaque government body making decisions in the dark and justifying them with unknown data points.
  • Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    People have provided their own definitions multiple times in the past. However each time the debate comes up again someone then pretends they cannot even possibly imagine what someone might mean when they use the term pejoratively, sometimes throwing in a 'who could be against being 'awake' to issues?' sarcasm, as if no one has ever sought to explain that stance, or as in this case suggest it is about reluctance. We'd never get everywhere if we sought to extract definitions of what ever individual means when they use a particular term, not least ones such as liberal/conservative/socialist, let alone ones like woke.

    People don't agree on what woke means, I say just leave it at that, I think we have enough of a flavour of what people think the term means without precise definition - I dare say people for whom it is a positive don't agree on its definition, since you think it has broadened to include recognition of other injustices yet someone else may think you unwoke by not broadening to enough injustices. Likewise some think it negative, but others take it much too far in my opinion (when anything negative is 'woke')
    To be a bit more serious, “Fascism” is an interesting comparator. It’s a word which the Left slings around a lot, even after much satire (recall The Young Ones and “Fascist!” as the constant left wing whine from Rik Mayall - an early Wokester character, looking back).

    But what does it mean? It is not like “Marxist” or “communist” where there are actual founding texts you can refer to (as you can, also, with most religions). Even “capitalist” is better defined, see Adam Smith and so on

    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Real Fascism is quite hard to find these days - except in Islam, where it flourishes. ISIS and Taliban are pure Fascism
    Does you think the Taliban are "Woke" or "Anti-woke" in that case?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    In Canada, our old mate Angus Reid has put out a poll with Liberals on 36, Conservatives 30 and NDP on 20.

    https://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2021.08.19_Federal_Election_Economy.pdf

    The Liberals have a 10 point lead in Ontario and a 16 point lead in Quebec which seems a little out of kilter with other polls but on those terms Trudeau would remain Prime Minister.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:


    They sure do. And it leads to some bizarre takes. Eg that America is pulling out of Afghanistan because woke liberals are obsessed with personal pronouns and don't give a shit about women being oppressed under Islam.

    There's nothing bizarre about pointing out the howling disconnect between the 'woke' liberals' obsession with invented trivia and their profound uninterest in the reality of what oppression of women really comprises.
    America has not pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home.

    And where's the evidence that liberals in the US are less interested than Conservatives (trad or MAGA) in female emancipation in other countries?
    Where did I say they were less interested? I said they were obsessed with invented trivia (nonsense about pronouns etc), and profoundly uninterested in real oppression. You're not seriously going to disagree with this, are you?

    Nor did I say that America pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home. You're inventing straw men.
    He can’t disagree with you, because what you say is painfully and obviously true, but he can’t admit you’re right, because it’s a religion with him, so he invents not just a straw man, but a total Worzel fucking Gummage of gibberish

    @kinabalu is intrinsically risible. I’d miss his lunacies if he ever actually opened his mind and raised his IQ over 100.04
    Or does the laugh-a-minute lunacy come more from the unHerd drivel pipe that thinks the moral fibre of the West is being sapped by "wokeness" such that it can no longer stand up and fight the enemy like a MAN?
    Was that an attempt at humour? Be honest, it was, wasn’t it? You actually and rather bravely did an attempted funniness. It’s honestly touching, like the doomed alpaca of PB comments
    No, it wasn't. I genuinely think you're a dim narcissistic wanker. You're a cliche. It's only your vocab and travel budget that keeps your head above the water.
    Aha! I feel like Laurence Olivier in “Marathon Man” when the sadist Nazi dentist drills directly into the nerve, and he turns and smiles, *almost* at the camera. Rewarding
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:


    They sure do. And it leads to some bizarre takes. Eg that America is pulling out of Afghanistan because woke liberals are obsessed with personal pronouns and don't give a shit about women being oppressed under Islam.

    There's nothing bizarre about pointing out the howling disconnect between the 'woke' liberals' obsession with invented trivia and their profound uninterest in the reality of what oppression of women really comprises.
    America has not pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home.

    And where's the evidence that liberals in the US are less interested than Conservatives (trad or MAGA) in female emancipation in other countries?
    Where did I say they were less interested? I said they were obsessed with invented trivia (nonsense about pronouns etc), and profoundly uninterested in real oppression. You're not seriously going to disagree with this, are you?

    Nor did I say that America pulled out of Afghanistan in order to pursue a radical liberal agenda at home. You're inventing straw men.
    He can’t disagree with you, because what you say is painfully and obviously true, but he can’t admit you’re right, because it’s a religion with him, so he invents not just a straw man, but a total Worzel fucking Gummage of gibberish

    @kinabalu is intrinsically risible. I’d miss his lunacies if he ever actually opened his mind and raised his IQ over 100.04
    Or does the laugh-a-minute lunacy come more from the unHerd drivel pipe that thinks the moral fibre of the West is being sapped by "wokeness" such that it can no longer stand up and fight the enemy like a MAN?
    Was that an attempt at humour? Be honest, it was, wasn’t it? You actually and rather bravely did an attempted funniness. It’s honestly touching, like the doomed alpaca of PB comments
    No, it wasn't. I genuinely think you're a dim narcissistic wanker. You're a cliche. It's only your vocab and travel budget that keeps your head above the water.
    Aha! I feel like Laurence Olivier in “Marathon Man” when the sadist Nazi dentist drills directly into the nerve, and he turns and smiles, *almost* at the camera. Rewarding
    "Is it safe?" - :smile:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    People have provided their own definitions multiple times in the past. However each time the debate comes up again someone then pretends they cannot even possibly imagine what someone might mean when they use the term pejoratively, sometimes throwing in a 'who could be against being 'awake' to issues?' sarcasm, as if no one has ever sought to explain that stance, or as in this case suggest it is about reluctance. We'd never get everywhere if we sought to extract definitions of what ever individual means when they use a particular term, not least ones such as liberal/conservative/socialist, let alone ones like woke.

    People don't agree on what woke means, I say just leave it at that, I think we have enough of a flavour of what people think the term means without precise definition - I dare say people for whom it is a positive don't agree on its definition, since you think it has broadened to include recognition of other injustices yet someone else may think you unwoke by not broadening to enough injustices. Likewise some think it negative, but others take it much too far in my opinion (when anything negative is 'woke')
    To be a bit more serious, “Fascism” is an interesting comparator. It’s a word which the Left slings around a lot, even after much satire (recall The Young Ones and “Fascist!” as the constant left wing whine from Rik Mayall - an early Wokester character, looking back).

    But what does it mean? It is not like “Marxist” or “communist” where there are actual founding texts you can refer to (as you can, also, with most religions). Even “capitalist” is better defined, see Adam Smith and so on

    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Real Fascism is quite hard to find these days - except in Islam, where it flourishes. ISIS and Taliban are pure Fascism
    Strictly speaking, a fascist is somebody who follows the ideas of D’Annunzio as interpreted by Mussolini.

    But it tends to be interpreted rather more widely than that. For example, Horthy is now frequently called a fascist, even though the term didn’t exist when he deposed Bela Kun.
    I’m not sure of your *strict definition*.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    “Fascism's origins are complex and include many seemingly contradictory viewpoints, ultimately centered around a mythos of national rebirth from decadence.[57] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who drew upon both left-wing organizational tactics and right-wing political views.[58] Italian Fascism gravitated to the right in the early 1920s.[59][60] A major element of fascist ideology that has been deemed to be far right is its stated goal to promote the right of a supposedly superior people to dominate, while purging society of supposedly inferior elements.[61]”

    As Wiki says, Fascism is famously hard to define. “Like nailing jelly to the wall”
    The reason it has become ‘hard to define’ is because it has become a catch-all for any authoritarian system that is not avowedly left wing (although ironically many aspects of it grew out of left wing ideals and many left wing organisations are indistinguishable from their fascist counterparts) partly because it was among the first of its kind and partly because of its considerable influence on other, later ideologies, like Nazism or Falangism (Horthy was not nearly such an influence on Franco as Mussolini was even though superficially the two had more in common).

    That doesn’t alter the fact that *strictly speaking* it was an Italian movement.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    Scott_xP said:

    DavidL said:

    is the FS really supposed to be on duty 52 weeks a year just in case?

    No wonder only buffoons and idiots want to go into politics these days.

    One would expect the FS to be smart enough to read a calendar
    You mean when Mike is on holiday, presumably.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    Hmmm - I’ll put you down as a ‘maybe,’ Ishmael.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    Athens was a "Slave-owning Democracy".
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Anyway, I suggest we take the time to draw up a list of all the people in the West who are properly active in the cause of female emancipation in the less developed world, and then we'll see whether there are more "AOC" left liberal woke types on there, or more Conservatives (of either the Brooks Brothers or Red Neck MAGA variety). I wonder what we'll find?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    Head of the British Armed Forces talking about the Taliban:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9904577/General-Sir-Nick-Carter-branded-Taliban-apologist-suggesting-group-changed.html

    "They are country boys. The fact is they live by a code of honour and a standard. It's called Pashtunwali. It has honour at the heart of what they do.

    They don't like corrupt government or governance that is self-serving and want an Afghanistan that is inclusive for all.

    I think they have changed and they recognise Afghanistan has evolved and the fundamental role women have played in that evolution. They say they want to respect women's rights under Islamic law, and that will be Sharia law, but that doesn't necessarily mean they won't allow them to be involved in government, education and medicine."
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    edited August 2021
    Leon said:


    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Sounds right up certain people's streets.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    alex_ said:

    Latest daily figure for England-only Covid hospital admissions is 832. Not great...

    Given that it’s been acknowledged that a significant number (50%?) of “Covid” hospital admissions are not in fact due to Covid, isn’t rising hospital admissions at least in part clearly linked to rising positive tests? So it’s a link between cases and hospitalisation, but not in a negative way.
    No. It's nothing like 50%, more like 10%, although it's not totally clear.
    isam said:
    Rory is such a loss to the Conservative party. Boris needs to widen the church to get people like him back on board.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    People have provided their own definitions multiple times in the past. However each time the debate comes up again someone then pretends they cannot even possibly imagine what someone might mean when they use the term pejoratively, sometimes throwing in a 'who could be against being 'awake' to issues?' sarcasm, as if no one has ever sought to explain that stance, or as in this case suggest it is about reluctance. We'd never get everywhere if we sought to extract definitions of what ever individual means when they use a particular term, not least ones such as liberal/conservative/socialist, let alone ones like woke.

    People don't agree on what woke means, I say just leave it at that, I think we have enough of a flavour of what people think the term means without precise definition - I dare say people for whom it is a positive don't agree on its definition, since you think it has broadened to include recognition of other injustices yet someone else may think you unwoke by not broadening to enough injustices. Likewise some think it negative, but others take it much too far in my opinion (when anything negative is 'woke')
    To be a bit more serious, “Fascism” is an interesting comparator. It’s a word which the Left slings around a lot, even after much satire (recall The Young Ones and “Fascist!” as the constant left wing whine from Rik Mayall - an early Wokester character, looking back).

    But what does it mean? It is not like “Marxist” or “communist” where there are actual founding texts you can refer to (as you can, also, with most religions). Even “capitalist” is better defined, see Adam Smith and so on

    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Real Fascism is quite hard to find these days - except in Islam, where it flourishes. ISIS and Taliban are pure Fascism
    Strictly speaking, a fascist is somebody who follows the ideas of D’Annunzio as interpreted by Mussolini.

    But it tends to be interpreted rather more widely than that. For example, Horthy is now frequently called a fascist, even though the term didn’t exist when he deposed Bela Kun.
    I’m not sure of your *strict definition*.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    “Fascism's origins are complex and include many seemingly contradictory viewpoints, ultimately centered around a mythos of national rebirth from decadence.[57] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who drew upon both left-wing organizational tactics and right-wing political views.[58] Italian Fascism gravitated to the right in the early 1920s.[59][60] A major element of fascist ideology that has been deemed to be far right is its stated goal to promote the right of a supposedly superior people to dominate, while purging society of supposedly inferior elements.[61]”

    As Wiki says, Fascism is famously hard to define. “Like nailing jelly to the wall”
    The reason it has become ‘hard to define’ is because it has become a catch-all for any authoritarian system that is not avowedly left wing (although ironically many aspects of it grew out of left wing ideals and many left wing organisations are indistinguishable from their fascist counterparts) partly because it was among the first of its kind and partly because of its considerable influence on other, later ideologies, like Nazism or Falangism (Horthy was not nearly such an influence on Franco as Mussolini was even though superficially the two had more in common).

    That doesn’t alter the fact that *strictly speaking* it was an Italian movement.
    It was indeed Italian, of course

    Early Fascism, Ur-Fascism, proto-Fascism a la d’Annunzio had some genuinely appealing aspects, and some remarkable ideas, d’Annunzio’s free city of Fiume was not some horrible racist dystopia. It could have evolved into a kind of patriotic aristo-socialist libertarianism. Interesting, at least

    But the much more brutish Mussolini coarsened it, and of course Nazism came along like Moloch, and devoured it, and turned it all into something disgustingly evil
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    Leon said:


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    “Fascism's origins are complex and include many seemingly contradictory viewpoints, ultimately centered around a mythos of national rebirth from decadence.[57] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who drew upon both left-wing organizational tactics and right-wing political views.[58] Italian Fascism gravitated to the right in the early 1920s.[59][60] A major element of fascist ideology that has been deemed to be far right is its stated goal to promote the right of a supposedly superior people to dominate, while purging society of supposedly inferior elements.[61]”

    As Wiki says, Fascism is famously hard to define. “Like nailing jelly to the wall”

    Fascism and Communism shared a lot of ideas and terms like "left" and "right" are worse than useless.

    Both emphasised modernity and saw technology and industrialisation as mechanisms by which the productivity of the individual could be harnessed for the collective benefit.

    Both were anti-individual - at best, the individual was a servant of the State, at worst a mere unit of economic production or consumption. It helped to have citizens who weren't just docile but actively "loyal" so cultural and traditional images and institutions were emphasised (more in Fascism). National identity was developed around culture and history reflecting the notion of the State on progress, achievement, victory etc.

    Communism often despised these traditional institutions but used them when needed especially in time of national crisis.

    Both Fascist and Communist architecture emphasised modernity and conformity. Buildings were vast and functional - the individual reduced to an irrelevance against such scale yet there are occasional nods to similar State structures of the past - the Roman Empire being one example which had particular resonance to the Italian Fascists for obvious reasons.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    People have provided their own definitions multiple times in the past. However each time the debate comes up again someone then pretends they cannot even possibly imagine what someone might mean when they use the term pejoratively, sometimes throwing in a 'who could be against being 'awake' to issues?' sarcasm, as if no one has ever sought to explain that stance, or as in this case suggest it is about reluctance. We'd never get everywhere if we sought to extract definitions of what ever individual means when they use a particular term, not least ones such as liberal/conservative/socialist, let alone ones like woke.

    People don't agree on what woke means, I say just leave it at that, I think we have enough of a flavour of what people think the term means without precise definition - I dare say people for whom it is a positive don't agree on its definition, since you think it has broadened to include recognition of other injustices yet someone else may think you unwoke by not broadening to enough injustices. Likewise some think it negative, but others take it much too far in my opinion (when anything negative is 'woke')
    To be a bit more serious, “Fascism” is an interesting comparator. It’s a word which the Left slings around a lot, even after much satire (recall The Young Ones and “Fascist!” as the constant left wing whine from Rik Mayall - an early Wokester character, looking back).

    But what does it mean? It is not like “Marxist” or “communist” where there are actual founding texts you can refer to (as you can, also, with most religions). Even “capitalist” is better defined, see Adam Smith and so on

    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Real Fascism is quite hard to find these days - except in Islam, where it flourishes. ISIS and Taliban are pure Fascism
    Strictly speaking, a fascist is somebody who follows the ideas of D’Annunzio as interpreted by Mussolini.

    But it tends to be interpreted rather more widely than that. For example, Horthy is now frequently called a fascist, even though the term didn’t exist when he deposed Bela Kun.
    I’m not sure of your *strict definition*.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    “Fascism's origins are complex and include many seemingly contradictory viewpoints, ultimately centered around a mythos of national rebirth from decadence.[57] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who drew upon both left-wing organizational tactics and right-wing political views.[58] Italian Fascism gravitated to the right in the early 1920s.[59][60] A major element of fascist ideology that has been deemed to be far right is its stated goal to promote the right of a supposedly superior people to dominate, while purging society of supposedly inferior elements.[61]”

    As Wiki says, Fascism is famously hard to define. “Like nailing jelly to the wall”
    The reason it has become ‘hard to define’ is because it has become a catch-all for any authoritarian system that is not avowedly left wing (although ironically many aspects of it grew out of left wing ideals and many left wing organisations are indistinguishable from their fascist counterparts) partly because it was among the first of its kind and partly because of its considerable influence on other, later ideologies, like Nazism or Falangism (Horthy was not nearly such an influence on Franco as Mussolini was even though superficially the two had more in common).

    That doesn’t alter the fact that *strictly speaking* it was an Italian movement.
    It was indeed Italian, of course

    Early Fascism, Ur-Fascism, proto-Fascism a la d’Annunzio had some genuinely appealing aspects, and some remarkable ideas, d’Annunzio’s free city of Fiume was not some horrible racist dystopia. It could have evolved into a kind of patriotic aristo-socialist libertarianism. Interesting, at least

    But the much more brutish Mussolini coarsened it, and of course Nazism came along like Moloch, and devoured it, and turned it all into something disgustingly evil
    I misread that as ‘like Murdoch’ for a minute.

    Disturbingly it still made perfect sense…
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58271911

    As I was saying earlier today. The politicians will overrule the JCVI. There's no way they risk another cancellation of Christmas like last year. We have the vaccines, what's the point in not using them.

    You’re good at this stuff Max. Why is the JCVI coming out with this weird bollocks?

    It seems obviously nonsense to me. We have the jabs, there’s no evidence 3rd jabs will do any harm, and mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial

    Are they on drugs or what?
    Honestly I'm not sure. The stance should be "as many vaccines as it takes" to beat it. For some reason they're bollocksing around suggesting it might be dangerous for under 18s but then not, third doses may not be required but we all know they're going to happen. I don't get it at all.
    "mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial"

    Presumably the JCVI are looking at precisely that. Is there enough science to justify the boost?
    It doesn't matter if there is or isn't, the side effect risk of vaccines is extremely low and we've bought the vaccines. Frankly, not doing them us a huge public health risk. I don't understand what kind of inputs the JCVI are looking at and once again we're left with an opaque government body making decisions in the dark and justifying them with unknown data points.
    If we have the doses and we don't need them then we should give them to countries that do need them. Loads of places where the old and vulnerable have had no jab.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450

    Leon said:


    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Sounds right up certain people's streets.
    Yes, North Charlotte Street, leading to Bute House
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751
    MattW said:

    isam said:

    Most sensible people know us being in Afghanistan was an impossible situation, and it seems even less possible to definitively apportion the blame for what has gone on.

    I suppose Labour have to act outraged about everything, scoring political points is what they need to do to win power.

    Trump’s take on events seems crazy given he wanted troops out earlier. Biden could have scrapped Trump’s plans of he’d wanted to. Blair could have not gone in. Brown, Cameron & May could have taken us out. Hard to see what Boris could have done differently, given we are pegged to the decisions of the US.

    My own view is we shouldn’t meddle in these matters anyway. Not Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, anywhere, unless they’re bombing us. Be pacifists. But I suppose it’s not as easy as that either

    The world is a battle of ideas. China's way. The West's way. The Theocrats' way. The Globalists' way. The authoritarians' way.

    If you believe in something you will argue for it, live by its tenets and back that up with force if necessary.

    We may argue for our Western way, but we have not lived by it in recent times , don't intend to in the future and have no stomach for a fight.
    Having listened to the Parliametary debate, I heard very
    isam said:
    Is the rest of the programme worth a listen?
    Sigh. Rory is certainly eccentric but is an intellectual giant compared to most else on offer in Parliament. A shame he chose to blow up his career over Brexit, when there was such little point in doing so.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    Leon said:


    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Sounds right up certain people's streets.
    In fairness not every Nationalist is like that ( you, for example).
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,729
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    kinabalu said:

    Fishing said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    This is jaw dropping. The goings on at Chelsea FC youth team in the 90s.

    “ This is a tough read (be warned).

    The court documents, obtained by @TheAthleticUK, about culture of ‘racist bullying’ at Chelsea in the 1990s.

    One coach, Graham Rix, accused of throwing scalding coffee over the head of a black youth-team player.”

    https://twitter.com/dtathletic/status/1428250498465927168?s=21

    Graham Rix, the man who got done for under aged sex. Blow me down with a feather.
    I just can’t get my head round how uncouth and nasty they were. What the coaches are accused of saying is what I am guessing people anonymously post on social media nowadays when black players miss penalties or make mistakes etc - amazing to think they thought they could get away with it, if true of course.
    It might be amazing nowadays but in the 80s or early 90s (and probably before but I wouldnt know) a lot of the areas dominated by young men were like that. Bullying, violence or racism wouldnt have been at all unusual in the army, police, football or rugby. Not necessarily expected, but not surprising at the time either.
    My first job was as a runner at the LIFFE floor in the mid 90s. 3000 people there and probably 2975 were white. But almost all the cleaners were black and I was never comfortable with it. I remember seeing one bloke throw some food in the floor in the canteen just so the cleaner would pick it up. Coming from Essex and working there/Romford market, playing Sunday football, I heard millions of racist comments and jokes, but never really brutal, face to face, what I’d call Deep South style hatred, like that.
    The City was bad in my day too. The sexism was what I noticed most. I would hope that the sort of stuff that was routine then wouldn't be tolerated now.

    "Oh fuck, that's wrong, gonna call Seddlements."

    Fiona picks up. "Yep."

    "Hey juicytits, can you be an angel and cancel a trade for me."

    "I can cancel something, Darren, yes. Be delighted to."

    She hangs up and calls HR.
    I had a job in the City in the mid-90s. There were 6 men and two women on a trading/analysis desk at a large investment bank. I don't remember a single sexist comment all the time I was there, either by the standards of the time or by today's incredibly sensitive standards. But maybe I was just using the bathroom or doing the photocopying every time they were made.
    Yep, about that period. So either you dropped into a bubble of woke - ahead of its time - or something about your presence deterred any nonsense. Either way being terrific news.
    A lot of things have been the equivalent of Woke for a very long time. For example, BBC TV and radio presentation/continuity have been at present day levels of Wokeness since about 1990. (Not making a partisan point, just an observation).
    What about Dave Lee Travis, aka the Hairy Cornflake? He wasn't very woke.
    The Hairy Cornflake last presented Top of the Pops in 1984.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/totp2/trivia/presenters/list5.shtml
    Yep. But he kept on rocking the nation on Radio 1 until 1993.
    Roger Twiggy Day is still doing 60s era and circa that on Boom Radio 7pm daily
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    kinabalu said:

    Anyway, I suggest we take the time to draw up a list of all the people in the West who are properly active in the cause of female emancipation in the less developed world, and then we'll see whether there are more "AOC" left liberal woke types on there, or more Conservatives (of either the Brooks Brothers or Red Neck MAGA variety). I wonder what we'll find?

    Good idea. You could start with these two:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nus_Ghani
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rory_Stewart
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    moonshine said:

    MattW said:

    isam said:

    Most sensible people know us being in Afghanistan was an impossible situation, and it seems even less possible to definitively apportion the blame for what has gone on.

    I suppose Labour have to act outraged about everything, scoring political points is what they need to do to win power.

    Trump’s take on events seems crazy given he wanted troops out earlier. Biden could have scrapped Trump’s plans of he’d wanted to. Blair could have not gone in. Brown, Cameron & May could have taken us out. Hard to see what Boris could have done differently, given we are pegged to the decisions of the US.

    My own view is we shouldn’t meddle in these matters anyway. Not Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, anywhere, unless they’re bombing us. Be pacifists. But I suppose it’s not as easy as that either

    The world is a battle of ideas. China's way. The West's way. The Theocrats' way. The Globalists' way. The authoritarians' way.

    If you believe in something you will argue for it, live by its tenets and back that up with force if necessary.

    We may argue for our Western way, but we have not lived by it in recent times , don't intend to in the future and have no stomach for a fight.
    Having listened to the Parliametary debate, I heard very
    isam said:
    Is the rest of the programme worth a listen?
    Sigh. Rory is certainly eccentric but is an intellectual giant compared to most else on offer in Parliament. A shame he chose to blow up his career over Brexit, when there was such little point in doing so.
    Especially when he recognised the need to deliver so much more than his then boss. If she had listened to him she may well have delivered a softer Brexit and held on to power.

    So he’s not an unmixed blessing.
  • This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,005
    Catching up quickly, I may have become a little confused.
    According to contrarian, the CCP were inspired by the responses to Spanish Flu?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    Leon said:

    Leon said:


    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Sounds right up certain people's streets.
    Yes, North Charlotte Street, leading to Bute House
    Poor, very poor..

    I expected better from the sage of the Salmond enquiry. Oh, that's right, I didn't.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Evening chaps.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    Andy_JS said:

    Head of the British Armed Forces talking about the Taliban:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9904577/General-Sir-Nick-Carter-branded-Taliban-apologist-suggesting-group-changed.html

    "They are country boys. The fact is they live by a code of honour and a standard. It's called Pashtunwali. It has honour at the heart of what they do.

    They don't like corrupt government or governance that is self-serving and want an Afghanistan that is inclusive for all.

    I think they have changed and they recognise Afghanistan has evolved and the fundamental role women have played in that evolution. They say they want to respect women's rights under Islamic law, and that will be Sharia law, but that doesn't necessarily mean they won't allow them to be involved in government, education and medicine."

    “Country boys”

    Jesus fucking Christ. How is he head of the British Armed Forces. He’s either an illiterate prick or disturbingly disordered

    “Hitler, Goebbels, think of the Dukes of Hazzard, but with bratwurst”
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection

    I tell you what no wonder the Afghan army failed. They were probably all outsourced through sub-contractors
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,708
    kinabalu said:

    Anyway, I suggest we take the time to draw up a list of all the people in the West who are properly active in the cause of female emancipation in the less developed world...

    While we're on definitions, does being "properly active" in spreading Western values to the less developed world make you an imperialist or a missionary?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
    It's all bloody lovely, but that doesn't make it right. That Keats shtick about "Beauty is truth, truth beauty" is just as wrong as it is possible to be. To me the most beautiful thing in the world, by a country mile, is St Peter's Rome, but everything it says and stands for just ain't so.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:


    Yet we use it and a lot of us feel we know it when we see it, even if we can’t always pin it down convincingly. To me Fascist means a worship of power, patriarchy, suppression of minorities and/or women, a general love of violent action by the tribe/nation, aggressive expansion, an adoration and veneration of leaders, an intolerance of dissent, an innate and inordinate pride in a narrow identity, lots of flags and guns and boasting

    Sounds right up certain people's streets.
    In fairness not every Nationalist is like that ( you, for example).
    Please, no 'I'm a lovely Britpat not a ghastly Scotnat like you' prattle before the lagershed.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Evening chaps.

    The sequel to Anthony Powell's "Afternoon Men"?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751
    DavidL said:

    moonshine said:

    MattW said:

    isam said:

    Most sensible people know us being in Afghanistan was an impossible situation, and it seems even less possible to definitively apportion the blame for what has gone on.

    I suppose Labour have to act outraged about everything, scoring political points is what they need to do to win power.

    Trump’s take on events seems crazy given he wanted troops out earlier. Biden could have scrapped Trump’s plans of he’d wanted to. Blair could have not gone in. Brown, Cameron & May could have taken us out. Hard to see what Boris could have done differently, given we are pegged to the decisions of the US.

    My own view is we shouldn’t meddle in these matters anyway. Not Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, anywhere, unless they’re bombing us. Be pacifists. But I suppose it’s not as easy as that either

    The world is a battle of ideas. China's way. The West's way. The Theocrats' way. The Globalists' way. The authoritarians' way.

    If you believe in something you will argue for it, live by its tenets and back that up with force if necessary.

    We may argue for our Western way, but we have not lived by it in recent times , don't intend to in the future and have no stomach for a fight.
    Having listened to the Parliametary debate, I heard very
    isam said:
    Is the rest of the programme worth a listen?
    Sigh. Rory is certainly eccentric but is an intellectual giant compared to most else on offer in Parliament. A shame he chose to blow up his career over Brexit, when there was such little point in doing so.
    Especially when he recognised the need to deliver so much more than his then boss. If she had listened to him she may well have delivered a softer Brexit and held on to power.

    So he’s not an unmixed blessing.
    It was always very curious to me that Cameron pissed him away on the back benches and then only belatedly gave him a junior role at Defra.

    Then Theresa May comes in, here’s a guy who’s walked the length of Afghanistan, speaks Pashtun and done over 100 trips there. I know! Let’s make him Minister for Africa! Hmm actually no prisons he can do that instead.

    I do wonder what turn his career takes now. A shame he didn’t stand for the Lib Dems in 2019 and take over the leadership after the election.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    stodge said:

    Leon said:


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    “Fascism's origins are complex and include many seemingly contradictory viewpoints, ultimately centered around a mythos of national rebirth from decadence.[57] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who drew upon both left-wing organizational tactics and right-wing political views.[58] Italian Fascism gravitated to the right in the early 1920s.[59][60] A major element of fascist ideology that has been deemed to be far right is its stated goal to promote the right of a supposedly superior people to dominate, while purging society of supposedly inferior elements.[61]”

    As Wiki says, Fascism is famously hard to define. “Like nailing jelly to the wall”

    Fascism and Communism shared a lot of ideas and terms like "left" and "right" are worse than useless.

    Both emphasised modernity and saw technology and industrialisation as mechanisms by which the productivity of the individual could be harnessed for the collective benefit.

    Both were anti-individual - at best, the individual was a servant of the State, at worst a mere unit of economic production or consumption. It helped to have citizens who weren't just docile but actively "loyal" so cultural and traditional images and institutions were emphasised (more in Fascism). National identity was developed around culture and history reflecting the notion of the State on progress, achievement, victory etc.

    Communism often despised these traditional institutions but used them when needed especially in time of national crisis.

    Both Fascist and Communist architecture emphasised modernity and conformity. Buildings were vast and functional - the individual reduced to an irrelevance against such scale yet there are occasional nods to similar State structures of the past - the Roman Empire being one example which had particular resonance to the Italian Fascists for obvious reasons.
    And yet some of the Italian progenitors of Fascism were passionately individualistic. Artists. Poets. Futurists. There was a cycling Futurist regiment in the White War against Austria (ie our Great War)

    It’s a wonderfully interesting history. The best place to study it is Rovereto, in the lower Dolomites, which has a very moving museum to the White War and a brilliant gallery full of Futurism

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rovereto
  • MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58271911

    As I was saying earlier today. The politicians will overrule the JCVI. There's no way they risk another cancellation of Christmas like last year. We have the vaccines, what's the point in not using them.

    You’re good at this stuff Max. Why is the JCVI coming out with this weird bollocks?

    It seems obviously nonsense to me. We have the jabs, there’s no evidence 3rd jabs will do any harm, and mounting evidence they might be not just beneficial but crucial

    Are they on drugs or what?
    Honestly I'm not sure. The stance should be "as many vaccines as it takes" to beat it. For some reason they're bollocksing around suggesting it might be dangerous for under 18s but then not, third doses may not be required but we all know they're going to happen. I don't get it at all.
    I'd suggest its people enjoying their position of unexpected importance.
  • kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    Donald Kagan has just died:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Kagan

    His Introduction to Ancient Greek History is available as a YaleCourse on YouTube:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FrHGAd_yto&list=PL023BCE5134243987
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381
    DavidL said:

    Evening chaps.

    This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection

    FFS.
    There is no way we are going to get them all out but we need to do what we can. This is just outrageous.
    I didn't read the earlier posts as I should before jumping to conclusions..

    I did get momentarily excited mind you, because I thought you had a plan to purge Johnson's Cabinet.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
    It's all bloody lovely, but that doesn't make it right. That Keats shtick about "Beauty is truth, truth beauty" is just as wrong as it is possible to be. To me the most beautiful thing in the world, by a country mile, is St Peter's Rome, but everything it says and stands for just ain't so.
    40 years ago now I went on a study tour to Rome with the University. It was probably the best holiday I ever had. We were staying near the Vatican and every morning I went up to St Peter’s about 7.00 am to look around. It is the most magical building in the world. Every day I used to end up looking at the Pieta. I was convinced that if I looked long enough i would catch the moment marble actually moved.

    And I am not even vaguely religious.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection

    I didn't think we were allowed to use the word *****. Although I do agree.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,259
    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
    Well that's a couple of things to look out next time I'm in Athens. I made it up the Areopagus but not to the Pnyx, and the Stoa Poikile seemed to be in a fenced-off area of the Ágora over the railway line you couldn't visit. And I didn't have time to visit Eleusis which I believe is a bus ride out of town.

    You should, of course, train up and run the Athens marathon - the original route, from Marathon to Athens, ending in the 1896 Olympic Stadium.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
    It's all bloody lovely, but that doesn't make it right. That Keats shtick about "Beauty is truth, truth beauty" is just as wrong as it is possible to be. To me the most beautiful thing in the world, by a country mile, is St Peter's Rome, but everything it says and stands for just ain't so.
    St Peter’s is the most “beautiful thing in the world by a country mile”. Really?

    An eccentric opinion. It’s far from a masterpiece. Most people accept that Bramante and Michelangelo etc made it too big with the dome set too far back as a result, so it lacks drama and poetry. It’s just BIG and grandiose. Bernini improved it with the embracing colonnades but it still doesn’t work as it should (given the money and talent involved, it’s a bit like Star Wars 7 or whatever)

    Of course it contains world class art. Michelangelo’s Pieta is almost beyond comprehension, given the age he was when he did it
  • DavidL said:

    Evening chaps.

    This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection

    FFS.
    There is no way we are going to get them all out but we need to do what we can. This is just outrageous.
    Priti Patel hasn't stopped cackling since the decision was made, Boris Johnson is probably tupping the secretary, whilst Raab is still on holiday mode to notice.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    moonshine said:

    DavidL said:

    moonshine said:

    MattW said:

    isam said:

    Most sensible people know us being in Afghanistan was an impossible situation, and it seems even less possible to definitively apportion the blame for what has gone on.

    I suppose Labour have to act outraged about everything, scoring political points is what they need to do to win power.

    Trump’s take on events seems crazy given he wanted troops out earlier. Biden could have scrapped Trump’s plans of he’d wanted to. Blair could have not gone in. Brown, Cameron & May could have taken us out. Hard to see what Boris could have done differently, given we are pegged to the decisions of the US.

    My own view is we shouldn’t meddle in these matters anyway. Not Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, anywhere, unless they’re bombing us. Be pacifists. But I suppose it’s not as easy as that either

    The world is a battle of ideas. China's way. The West's way. The Theocrats' way. The Globalists' way. The authoritarians' way.

    If you believe in something you will argue for it, live by its tenets and back that up with force if necessary.

    We may argue for our Western way, but we have not lived by it in recent times , don't intend to in the future and have no stomach for a fight.
    Having listened to the Parliametary debate, I heard very
    isam said:
    Is the rest of the programme worth a listen?
    Sigh. Rory is certainly eccentric but is an intellectual giant compared to most else on offer in Parliament. A shame he chose to blow up his career over Brexit, when there was such little point in doing so.
    Especially when he recognised the need to deliver so much more than his then boss. If she had listened to him she may well have delivered a softer Brexit and held on to power.

    So he’s not an unmixed blessing.
    It was always very curious to me that Cameron pissed him away on the back benches and then only belatedly gave him a junior role at Defra.

    Then Theresa May comes in, here’s a guy who’s walked the length of Afghanistan, speaks Pashtun and done over 100 trips there. I know! Let’s make him Minister for Africa! Hmm actually no prisons he can do that instead.

    I do wonder what turn his career takes now. A shame he didn’t stand for the Lib Dems in 2019 and take over the leadership after the election.
    Possibly Cameron saw a more able rival. Etonians are now unknown for ruthless ambition
  • MaxPB said:

    What I'm still not clear on about the supposed (and real) lack of UK government strategy on Afghanistan - what exactly were the critics such as Theresa May expecting? That Dominic Raab and Boris would snap their fingers and miraculously transport 50k troops to Kabul to keep hold of the country while we resettled millions of people to other parts of the world? These MPs have been overseeing a huge drop in military spending so we can spunk the cash on buying votes from old people and now they're bitching about it.

    Pound shop imperialists.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    DavidL said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
    It's all bloody lovely, but that doesn't make it right. That Keats shtick about "Beauty is truth, truth beauty" is just as wrong as it is possible to be. To me the most beautiful thing in the world, by a country mile, is St Peter's Rome, but everything it says and stands for just ain't so.
    40 years ago now I went on a study tour to Rome with the University. It was probably the best holiday I ever had. We were staying near the Vatican and every morning I went up to St Peter’s about 7.00 am to look around. It is the most magical building in the world. Every day I used to end up looking at the Pieta. I was convinced that if I looked long enough i would catch the moment marble actually moved.

    And I am not even vaguely religious.
    Fantastic, isn't it?

    I love the paradox about sculpture that it is purely subtractive. To make the Pieta, all you have to do is take a block of marble, and remove from it all the bits which are not the Pieta.
  • TresTres Posts: 2,702

    DavidL said:

    Evening chaps.

    This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection

    FFS.
    There is no way we are going to get them all out but we need to do what we can. This is just outrageous.
    Priti Patel hasn't stopped cackling since the decision was made, Boris Johnson is probably tupping the secretary, whilst Raab is still on holiday mode to notice.
    welcome to the kakistocracy
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
    It's all bloody lovely, but that doesn't make it right. That Keats shtick about "Beauty is truth, truth beauty" is just as wrong as it is possible to be. To me the most beautiful thing in the world, by a country mile, is St Peter's Rome, but everything it says and stands for just ain't so.
    St Peter’s is the most “beautiful thing in the world by a country mile”. Really?

    An eccentric opinion. It’s far from a masterpiece. Most people accept that Bramante and Michelangelo etc made it too big with the dome set too far back as a result, so it lacks drama and poetry. It’s just BIG and grandiose. Bernini improved it with the embracing colonnades but it still doesn’t work as it should (given the money and talent involved, it’s a bit like Star Wars 7 or whatever)

    Of course it contains world class art. Michelangelo’s Pieta is almost beyond comprehension, given the age he was when he did it
    Yes, in my opinion.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    DavidL said:

    Evening chaps.

    This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection

    FFS.
    There is no way we are going to get them all out but we need to do what we can. This is just outrageous.
    I didn't read the earlier posts as I should before jumping to conclusions..

    I did get momentarily excited mind you, because I thought you had a plan to purge Johnson's Cabinet.
    I will not be tempted but If I was HS, Education Secretary and Local government Secretary (whatever the official title) just might be the place to start.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
    Well that's a couple of things to look out next time I'm in Athens. I made it up the Areopagus but not to the Pnyx, and the Stoa Poikile seemed to be in a fenced-off area of the Ágora over the railway line you couldn't visit. And I didn't have time to visit Eleusis which I believe is a bus ride out of town.

    You should, of course, train up and run the Athens marathon - the original route, from Marathon to Athens, ending in the 1896 Olympic Stadium.
    Sadly when we visited Athens we didn't have time to make the trip out to Marathon, which I'd loved to have done. To see and pay homage at the soros burial mound, which contains the ashes of the 192 Athenian hoplites who fell at the battle, and to be at the place where the course of human history hung in the balance.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,775
    Leon said:

    stodge said:

    Leon said:


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    “Fascism's origins are complex and include many seemingly contradictory viewpoints, ultimately centered around a mythos of national rebirth from decadence.[57] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who drew upon both left-wing organizational tactics and right-wing political views.[58] Italian Fascism gravitated to the right in the early 1920s.[59][60] A major element of fascist ideology that has been deemed to be far right is its stated goal to promote the right of a supposedly superior people to dominate, while purging society of supposedly inferior elements.[61]”

    As Wiki says, Fascism is famously hard to define. “Like nailing jelly to the wall”

    Fascism and Communism shared a lot of ideas and terms like "left" and "right" are worse than useless.

    Both emphasised modernity and saw technology and industrialisation as mechanisms by which the productivity of the individual could be harnessed for the collective benefit.

    Both were anti-individual - at best, the individual was a servant of the State, at worst a mere unit of economic production or consumption. It helped to have citizens who weren't just docile but actively "loyal" so cultural and traditional images and institutions were emphasised (more in Fascism). National identity was developed around culture and history reflecting the notion of the State on progress, achievement, victory etc.

    Communism often despised these traditional institutions but used them when needed especially in time of national crisis.

    Both Fascist and Communist architecture emphasised modernity and conformity. Buildings were vast and functional - the individual reduced to an irrelevance against such scale yet there are occasional nods to similar State structures of the past - the Roman Empire being one example which had particular resonance to the Italian Fascists for obvious reasons.
    And yet some of the Italian progenitors of Fascism were passionately individualistic. Artists. Poets. Futurists. There was a cycling Futurist regiment in the White War against Austria (ie our Great War)

    It’s a wonderfully interesting history. The best place to study it is Rovereto, in the lower Dolomites, which has a very moving museum to the White War and a brilliant gallery full of Futurism

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rovereto
    I spent some time looking for what might be behind Germany's incredible rise in the 1930s. I read people like Spengler etc. I concluded absolutely nothing other than it wasn't anything much the government did.

    That having been said I'm not so sure that Italian Fascism wouldn't have bourne some fruit. A bit like Trump.

    Is good government actually just rabble-rousing?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    Woke means narcissistic privileged middle class twats who are overly obsessed with perceived oppressions in the West in a way which, they think, makes them look extra caring and aware, but which makes everyone else privately puke and/or laugh in derision. There you go
    Doesn’t that make you ‘woke?’
    Either that, or comatose.
  • DavidL said:

    Can you imagine Rory as HS ? Now there would be a government worth voting for.

    All the best and ablest Conservatives left the party or were kicked out in 2019.

    But now we get Patel, Raab, and Williamson as the cabinet.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,205

    This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection

    I tell you what no wonder the Afghan army failed. They were probably all outsourced through sub-contractors
    I had a think on my run 🏃‍♂️ about 30 minutes ago, did Ghani take the cash 💸 to keep it safe for the government in exile 🤔
    Concluded he just robbed it since he'd have retreated to the Panshjr valley if he'd intended that
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    stodge said:

    In Canada, our old mate Angus Reid has put out a poll with Liberals on 36, Conservatives 30 and NDP on 20.

    https://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2021.08.19_Federal_Election_Economy.pdf

    The Liberals have a 10 point lead in Ontario and a 16 point lead in Quebec which seems a little out of kilter with other polls but on those terms Trudeau would remain Prime Minister.

    The latest polling average gives the Liberals a lead of about 4%, compared to 8% before the election was called. It looks like Canadians aren't that pleased about having an election at the moment, just 2 years after the previous one.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    DavidL said:

    Evening chaps.

    This government is led by absolute *****.

    More than 100 guards at the British embassy in Kabul have been told they are not eligible for UK government protection because they were hired through an outsourced contractor, the Guardian has learned.

    Most of the 125-strong team of security personnel, employed by the global security firm GardaWorld, have been given informal notice that they no longer have jobs guarding the embassy, several said.

    The guards, some of whom had been working for the UK embassy for over a decade, described feeling abandoned by British officials and their employer. Many have been forced into hiding, fearing for their lives.

    Meanwhile, more than 100 guards doing the same work for the US embassy, under a separate GardaWorld contract, have been evacuated and others were receiving support from the US embassy, according to a senior Afghan national GardaWorld employee in charge of human resources.


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/19/guards-at-kabul-embassy-told-they-are-ineligible-for-uk-protection

    FFS.
    There is no way we are going to get them all out but we need to do what we can. This is just outrageous.
    Priti Patel hasn't stopped cackling since the decision was made, Boris Johnson is probably tupping the secretary, whilst Raab is still on holiday mode to notice.
    I am generally a Tory but Christ , their choice of Home Secretaries really tests me. It is the indulgence of that evil, slithering, foul, crap that is found at the bottom of the party. Narrow minded, bigoted, sanctimonious, hypocritical, and those are the redeeming features.

    It honestly turns my stomach and I feel guilty that I turn a blind eye to it for the bigger picture.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,381

    DavidL said:

    Can you imagine Rory as HS ? Now there would be a government worth voting for.

    All the best and ablest Conservatives left the party or were kicked out in 2019.

    But now we get Patel, Raab, and Williamson as the cabinet.
    Why does Dowden never make the triumvirate of shame?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,720
      
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Foxy said:

    With respect to Woke and anti-Woke terminology matters. It isn't helpful to use Woke interchangeably with anti-racism. For most people Woke (pro and anti) describes a distinct set of political and philosophical attitudes.

    Woke means awake to racism in society. The terms are interchangeable.
    In your opinion. To many of us it doesn't mean the same thing.
    I think the definition has broadened to include recognition of other injustices in society besides racism.

    What other definition do you use?

    I note that so called "anti-Woke" posters are very reluctant to provide the definition that they use.

    It may well be that it means some dark and brooding bogeyman to them, but it really is hard to understand what they mean.
    Woke means narcissistic privileged middle class twats who are overly obsessed with perceived oppressions in the West in a way which, they think, makes them look extra caring and aware, but which makes everyone else privately puke and/or laugh in derision. There you go
    Doesn’t that make you ‘woke?’
    Either that, or comatose.
    Could sleepy Joe be woke? Or could he be woken up?

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139

    DavidL said:

    Can you imagine Rory as HS ? Now there would be a government worth voting for.

    All the best and ablest Conservatives left the party or were kicked out in 2019.

    But now we get Patel, Raab, and Williamson as the cabinet.
    'The best and ablest' Conservatives I suppose now LDs like you then TSE?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    MaxPB said:

    What I'm still not clear on about the supposed (and real) lack of UK government strategy on Afghanistan - what exactly were the critics such as Theresa May expecting? That Dominic Raab and Boris would snap their fingers and miraculously transport 50k troops to Kabul to keep hold of the country while we resettled millions of people to other parts of the world? These MPs have been overseeing a huge drop in military spending so we can spunk the cash on buying votes from old people and now they're bitching about it.

    I have to say for all the wailing and gnashing of teeth and totally understandable sympathy for the plight of the Afghan people I simply don't see it as the geopolitical catastrophe some on here claim.

    Comparable to the fall of Saigon in 1975? Well perhaps but will it compare to the day we stand by and let the Russians march into Kiev - perhaps not. Is it as big a disaster as the loss of Iran in 1979? Hardly.

    The ultimate disaster will be the day NATO fails to live up to the doctrine of collective security - fortunately we've not seen that tested to date.

    I come back to the point I made it seems an eternity ago - in the end there was no one willing to fight for Afghanistan. A seemingly well-equipped army and administration disintegrated in days. Perhaps the problem was we believed our shiny things and our money could buy us security by proxy. The lesson may be that we either do our own dirty work or we don't do it.

    Yet we aren't the Roman Empire - we might have hoped momentarily in the aftermath of the fall of Communism and the liberation of Kuwait a Pax Americana could drive "the bad guys" from the face of the Earth and the goodness of liberal democracy would triumph for all time. Perhaps we believed the intervention of force of arms could prevail in the war against evil and we could topple evil here there and everywhere.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,450
    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    kle4 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Pericles:

    "Nor is it any longer possible for you to give up this empire … Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go."

    My favourite Pericles quote is the one where he basically says if he cocked up it was the peoples' fault for being persuaded by him in the first place*.

    "If you were persuaded by me to go to war because you thought I had the qualities necessary for leadership at least moderately more than other men, it is not right that I should now be blamed for doing wrong".

    *The book I read this in, by an actual expert, is in fairness more forgiving, probably correctly - 'He was that rare political leader in a democratic state who had told the people the truth, while pursuing disputed and even unpopular polices. [His] constant forthrightness left his angry listeners with no rejoinder, for they could not claim they had been uninformed or deceived'. (Kagan, The Peloponnesian War)
    He was a complete shit. Stole from the League to build the Parthenon, utterly abused democracy with his nasty little decree of 431 with the rider that "anyone proposing an amendment of this decree is to be put to death," destroyed Athens by starting and posthumously losing the war with Sparta. And that bellyachingly pompous funeral oration has to be read in light of the fact that "the many, not the few" judicially murdered his eldest son after Arginusae on a "The Sun says: string 'em up" sort of basis. The man was a c--t.
    The Pnyx is impressive, tho. Especially the view of the Acropolis. Where Pericles did his thang

    The original topography of Athens might just be the most impressive urban topography in the world. Genius. The temples soar above the parliament and both look down at the Agora, where the philosophers speak of ideas which rise above it all

    I finally made it to the actual Stoa Poikile yesterday, the painted Stoa, where Zeno spoke and the Stoics got their name. It’s now an Irish pub and a crappy clothes shop looming over some desultory rubble

    Yet, still, rather moving
    It's all bloody lovely, but that doesn't make it right. That Keats shtick about "Beauty is truth, truth beauty" is just as wrong as it is possible to be. To me the most beautiful thing in the world, by a country mile, is St Peter's Rome, but everything it says and stands for just ain't so.
    St Peter’s is the most “beautiful thing in the world by a country mile”. Really?

    An eccentric opinion. It’s far from a masterpiece. Most people accept that Bramante and Michelangelo etc made it too big with the dome set too far back as a result, so it lacks drama and poetry. It’s just BIG and grandiose. Bernini improved it with the embracing colonnades but it still doesn’t work as it should (given the money and talent involved, it’s a bit like Star Wars 7 or whatever)

    Of course it contains world class art. Michelangelo’s Pieta is almost beyond comprehension, given the age he was when he did it
    Yes, in my opinion.
    The joy of differing opinions. Long may they thrive on PB - and elsewhere

    We agree on the Pieta. How old was Michelangelo when he did it? 23 or something insane? No one believed he could be responsible so had to sneak in at night and carve his name on it. And it’s still there

    But my favourite mindgame is imagining him with Mum.

    “So, Michelangelo, what are you doing, wasting your time with boys? Again?”

    “Not always mum. i did this the other day”

    SHOWS MUM THE PIETA

    Cut to Mother’s face. Pause.
This discussion has been closed.