Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov: If there’s a second wave then CON voters most likely t

24

Comments

  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Anyway, my current bedtime listening is Neu! 2 - which feels somehow appropriate for an iconoclastic moment.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610
    CatMan said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    I should have said 2008, since that's when it finished.

    But yes, I agree with you.
    Can't remember a single episode that made me laugh once.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610
    Alistair said:

    "Culture War" == People doing things I don't like.

    Like rioting?
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Foxy said:

    FPT

    rcs1000 said:

    "In the states more whites are killed by blacks than vice versa."

    You do realise that as there are a lot more whites than blacks that's basically inevitable, right? That's simple mathematics. It's almost impossible, when whites outnumber blacks 5-to-1, for whites to kill more blacks, than vice-versa.

    Is it simple mathematics?

    The population is 1000. White 900, Black 100.

    Assume that 1-in-10 commit a murder randomly (and simultaneously).

    90 White people commit a murder, of which 81 are of White people and 9 are Black.

    10 Black people commit a murder, of which 9 are White and 1 is Black.

    The number of whites killed by blacks is equal to the number of blacks killed by whites.

    Perhaps even this simple mathematics is too complicated for me. What have I done wrong?
    Murder is not random. People tend to kill people that they know, and in a society like America, that tends to be people of the same ethnicity.
    Without being quite so dogmatic about it, same here?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610
    dixiedean said:

    Bit rich to see Sarah Vine worrying about "re-writing history" given her husband's attempts to re-write the curriculum.
    He's an expert on eye tests whilst driving though.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    rcs1000 said:



    I think voting for Jeremy Corbyn is deranged but if that's what people want then so be it. People have the right to be bonkers sometimes.

    If people want Gladstone, Churchill or Cromwell gone then so be it. I would personally oppose those coming down [except Cromwell, I'm indifferent to him]. If a statue of Churchill was pulled down by a mob I'd bet it would be back up within 24 hours.

    Who we have on our plinths today is up to the people today - not up to the people of the past. There is no divine right for any statue to remain on a plinth.

    Same for the future. If in the future a democratic government chose to take down a statue of Churchill and replace it with a statue of Boris Johnson or Keir Starmer then that would be up to that future government.

    Exactly.

    You can't have it both ways. Either the politicians are responsible for the statues, or they're not.
    Agreed, though other things being equal I'd vote to respect the judgments of the past, at least in a history museum. They need to be seen in retrospect as pretty bad a la Jimmy Savile - or slavers - before actual destruction is warranted.
    The Savile analogy is often made but is badly off point. Slave trading at the relevant times was both legal, and socially acceptable.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,032
    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    FPT

    rcs1000 said:

    "In the states more whites are killed by blacks than vice versa."

    You do realise that as there are a lot more whites than blacks that's basically inevitable, right? That's simple mathematics. It's almost impossible, when whites outnumber blacks 5-to-1, for whites to kill more blacks, than vice-versa.

    Is it simple mathematics?

    The population is 1000. White 900, Black 100.

    Assume that 1-in-10 commit a murder randomly (and simultaneously).

    90 White people commit a murder, of which 81 are of White people and 9 are Black.

    10 Black people commit a murder, of which 9 are White and 1 is Black.

    The number of whites killed by blacks is equal to the number of blacks killed by whites.

    Perhaps even this simple mathematics is too complicated for me. What have I done wrong?
    Murder is not random. People tend to kill people that they know, and in a society like America, that tends to be people of the same ethnicity.
    Without being quite so dogmatic about it, same here?
    I would expect so.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,229
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:



    I think voting for Jeremy Corbyn is deranged but if that's what people want then so be it. People have the right to be bonkers sometimes.

    If people want Gladstone, Churchill or Cromwell gone then so be it. I would personally oppose those coming down [except Cromwell, I'm indifferent to him]. If a statue of Churchill was pulled down by a mob I'd bet it would be back up within 24 hours.

    Who we have on our plinths today is up to the people today - not up to the people of the past. There is no divine right for any statue to remain on a plinth.

    Same for the future. If in the future a democratic government chose to take down a statue of Churchill and replace it with a statue of Boris Johnson or Keir Starmer then that would be up to that future government.

    Exactly.

    You can't have it both ways. Either the politicians are responsible for the statues, or they're not.
    Agreed, though other things being equal I'd vote to respect the judgments of the past, at least in a history museum. They need to be seen in retrospect as pretty bad a la Jimmy Savile - or slavers - before actual destruction is warranted.
    The Savile analogy is often made but is badly off point. Slave trading at the relevant times was both legal, and socially acceptable.
    Not when the Colston statue was put up though (1895).
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610
    Andy_JS said:
    Purity. Everything must be pure.

    Except myself and my own side obviously, where we can attack the jews today, now, 2020. Not the 19th century but now.

  • Options
    houndtanghoundtang Posts: 450
    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    Yes. Back then we still pretended to be a free society.
    See what 10 years of Tory rule have done? :wink:
    Woken the wokes?
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:



    I think voting for Jeremy Corbyn is deranged but if that's what people want then so be it. People have the right to be bonkers sometimes.

    If people want Gladstone, Churchill or Cromwell gone then so be it. I would personally oppose those coming down [except Cromwell, I'm indifferent to him]. If a statue of Churchill was pulled down by a mob I'd bet it would be back up within 24 hours.

    Who we have on our plinths today is up to the people today - not up to the people of the past. There is no divine right for any statue to remain on a plinth.

    Same for the future. If in the future a democratic government chose to take down a statue of Churchill and replace it with a statue of Boris Johnson or Keir Starmer then that would be up to that future government.

    Exactly.

    You can't have it both ways. Either the politicians are responsible for the statues, or they're not.
    Agreed, though other things being equal I'd vote to respect the judgments of the past, at least in a history museum. They need to be seen in retrospect as pretty bad a la Jimmy Savile - or slavers - before actual destruction is warranted.
    The Savile analogy is often made but is badly off point. Slave trading at the relevant times was both legal, and socially acceptable.
    Savile would have been accepted in ancient Rome or Greece were his disgusting behaviours were both legal and socially acceptable
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:



    I think voting for Jeremy Corbyn is deranged but if that's what people want then so be it. People have the right to be bonkers sometimes.

    If people want Gladstone, Churchill or Cromwell gone then so be it. I would personally oppose those coming down [except Cromwell, I'm indifferent to him]. If a statue of Churchill was pulled down by a mob I'd bet it would be back up within 24 hours.

    Who we have on our plinths today is up to the people today - not up to the people of the past. There is no divine right for any statue to remain on a plinth.

    Same for the future. If in the future a democratic government chose to take down a statue of Churchill and replace it with a statue of Boris Johnson or Keir Starmer then that would be up to that future government.

    Exactly.

    You can't have it both ways. Either the politicians are responsible for the statues, or they're not.
    Agreed, though other things being equal I'd vote to respect the judgments of the past, at least in a history museum. They need to be seen in retrospect as pretty bad a la Jimmy Savile - or slavers - before actual destruction is warranted.
    The Savile analogy is often made but is badly off point. Slave trading at the relevant times was both legal, and socially acceptable.
    It was not socially acceptable. The abolitionist movement didn't come out of no where. It was a long running reaction to an out of touch political and financial elite who engaged in a morally abhorrent practice.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,526
    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Not in the Oval Office, when Trump is re-elected.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,032
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:



    I think voting for Jeremy Corbyn is deranged but if that's what people want then so be it. People have the right to be bonkers sometimes.

    If people want Gladstone, Churchill or Cromwell gone then so be it. I would personally oppose those coming down [except Cromwell, I'm indifferent to him]. If a statue of Churchill was pulled down by a mob I'd bet it would be back up within 24 hours.

    Who we have on our plinths today is up to the people today - not up to the people of the past. There is no divine right for any statue to remain on a plinth.

    Same for the future. If in the future a democratic government chose to take down a statue of Churchill and replace it with a statue of Boris Johnson or Keir Starmer then that would be up to that future government.

    Exactly.

    You can't have it both ways. Either the politicians are responsible for the statues, or they're not.
    Agreed, though other things being equal I'd vote to respect the judgments of the past, at least in a history museum. They need to be seen in retrospect as pretty bad a la Jimmy Savile - or slavers - before actual destruction is warranted.
    The Savile analogy is often made but is badly off point. Slave trading at the relevant times was both legal, and socially acceptable.
    Colstons statue went up in 1895, didn't it?

    And in 1813, we had abolished the slave trade six years before (but not yet slavery) so hardly socially acceptable.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,339
    eadric said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Maybe. I doubt it.

    But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets

    A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
    If Churchill is the firewall, there are going to be a lot of empty pilths before they get to him.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Foxy said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.

    In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
    But you obviously remember them well.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,219
    Alistair said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    As a wheelchair user I found it offensive back in 2003. Sorry if that indicates a lacking sense of humour on my part.
    The amount of blackface in it didn't exactly pass without mention at the time.
    Watched it once and decided it was shit.
    Found its popularity incomprehensible.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,304
    So it looks like Boris gets a pass from his voters even if there is a second wave
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,943
    Wow! That is shocking; not surprising but shocking.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,032
    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.

    In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
    But you obviously remember them well.
    Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.

    A lot of comedy dates very badly.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,304
    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610

    eadric said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Maybe. I doubt it.

    But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets

    A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
    If Churchill is the firewall, there are going to be a lot of empty pilths before they get to him.
    After the statues will come the book burning.

    Churchill wrote some books.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,269
    Andy_JS said:
    Everyone finally realised it was repetitive boring shite?
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    CatMan said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    I should have said 2008, since that's when it finished.

    But yes, I agree with you.
    Can't remember a single episode that made me laugh once.
    You obviously watched them all to make sure. 😉
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,189

    Andy_JS said:
    Everyone finally realised it was repetitive boring shite?
    No reason to partially censor it.
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,032
    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Boris gets a pass from his voters even if there is a second wave

    I was in this Yougov.

    I blame the public and government equally, not least because the public elected a government of fuckwits!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    Charles said:

    Basement boy is worried about 'former' kings now. I'd imagine Leo is only former in the sense that being a currently dead king means that he's a former live king.

    https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/1270336319433199616?s=20

    King Alfred probably had slaves. He certainly executed hostages. Should we take down his statue?
    For reasons that are unclear to me anger generally (though not universally) seems to be restricted to events of the past 3 centuries or so. Beyond that obviously people did some awful things, but people don't get personally emotional about it.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    I'm sure Mr Floyd was far from an angel. And the police deserve our respect for dealing with the dangerous and the mentally ill and the drugged up on a daily basis. It cannot be easy remaining calm under constant provocation, and then subduing the psychotic.

    We need to give them some slack.

    Whether Mr Floyd was an angel or not is irrelevant. The Police have no mandate to strangle members of the public. When they arrest us, we are meant to survive the process unless we are shooting or hurling knives.
    That's exactly what my comment says. You just cut off the second half of it.
    I have gone back an re-read it and it seems rather ambiguous to me.
    You have to admit the selective quoting does change the context quite a bit.
    I often cut quotes down because otherwise they turn into sprawling, massively nested splurges that quickly become unreadable.
    It's harder when your own posts are sprawling, massive, and unreadable splurges. Believe me, I'd know.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,339
    If you thought Little Britain was unfunny and dodgy grounds, Bo' Selecta was a different level of the pits.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610
    alterego said:

    CatMan said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    I should have said 2008, since that's when it finished.

    But yes, I agree with you.
    Can't remember a single episode that made me laugh once.
    You obviously watched them all to make sure. 😉
    I'm always fair.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,189
    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Boris gets a pass from his voters even if there is a second wave

    Has there been new polling?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    Yes, they have. Occasionally for the better, though not always.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    Andy_JS said:
    I cannot say I much mind the motivation behind the abolition of slavery. That it was abolished and, more gradually than we'd like, a more equal society has become the norm, matters more than that a good thing was done for less than altruistic reasons by some.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    IshmaelZ said:

    rcs1000 said:



    I think voting for Jeremy Corbyn is deranged but if that's what people want then so be it. People have the right to be bonkers sometimes.

    If people want Gladstone, Churchill or Cromwell gone then so be it. I would personally oppose those coming down [except Cromwell, I'm indifferent to him]. If a statue of Churchill was pulled down by a mob I'd bet it would be back up within 24 hours.

    Who we have on our plinths today is up to the people today - not up to the people of the past. There is no divine right for any statue to remain on a plinth.

    Same for the future. If in the future a democratic government chose to take down a statue of Churchill and replace it with a statue of Boris Johnson or Keir Starmer then that would be up to that future government.

    Exactly.

    You can't have it both ways. Either the politicians are responsible for the statues, or they're not.
    Agreed, though other things being equal I'd vote to respect the judgments of the past, at least in a history museum. They need to be seen in retrospect as pretty bad a la Jimmy Savile - or slavers - before actual destruction is warranted.
    The Savile analogy is often made but is badly off point. Slave trading at the relevant times was both legal, and socially acceptable.
    As chattel, I believe ownership of a share in a slave was widespread amongst those who could afford it. Being only a share that included people of moderate means,
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    eadric said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Maybe. I doubt it.

    But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets

    A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
    I don't think there will be violence in the streets defending statues of some people. Resistance, I am sure, so I don't think Churchill for instance is in danger within 3 years, but the 'must fall' people are just more determined and driven. Take out a few by vandalism and, due to the target, watch them not get replaced. Watch others then get removed as a precaution against vandalism. Then see vandalism against more 'mainstream' figures, and cries of it going too far, maybe replacing those ones. But they'll be back. They want it so much more, and are so righteous.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT:

    I'm sure Mr Floyd was far from an angel. And the police deserve our respect for dealing with the dangerous and the mentally ill and the drugged up on a daily basis. It cannot be easy remaining calm under constant provocation, and then subduing the psychotic.

    We need to give them some slack.

    Whether Mr Floyd was an angel or not is irrelevant. The Police have no mandate to strangle members of the public. When they arrest us, we are meant to survive the process unless we are shooting or hurling knives.
    That's exactly what my comment says. You just cut off the second half of it.
    I have gone back an re-read it and it seems rather ambiguous to me.
    You have to admit the selective quoting does change the context quite a bit.
    I often cut quotes down because otherwise they turn into sprawling, massively nested splurges that quickly become unreadable.
    It's harder when your own posts are sprawling, massive, and unreadable splurges. Believe me, I'd know.
    Actually, most of mine are quite short.

    Here... have a smiley and cheer up :):)
  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    They really have changed yes. For the better in many ways.

    I had a look on YouTube following his apology to Craig David at a Bo Selecta clip, it was absolutely cringeworthy looking back at that.

    Personally I wouldn't remove it from the iPlayer library though, just put a disclaimer on it if need be that its dated and contains out of date stereotypes. That's what Disney have done with a number of old films, I put the original Dumbo movie on for the kids recently and there's a disclaimer at the start that it contains dated stereotypes. That's a reasonable method of dealing with it. Though having said that Song of the South is not available via DisneyPlus and I expect it never will be - I watched that at school in the 80s but I very doubt it will see the light of day ever again.
    If you make your way up to Dahlonega GA all the antique malls sell dvds produced by a local company, and Song of the South is one of them. A bit pricey at $20 but it's a good transfer
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,420

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Boris gets a pass from his voters even if there is a second wave

    I was in this Yougov.

    I blame the public and government equally, not least because the public elected a government of fuckwits!
    Perhaps this is all part of regaining control? :D:D
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,189
    I don't think this is a spoof website but it's difficult to tell sometimes.


    "Scientists Call for Academic Shutdown in Support of Black Lives

    White supremacy is baked into science and academia, from racist language in textbooks to a culture that excludes Black scientists from innovating and advancing at the same pace as their colleagues. But rather than more milquetoast statements and diversity initiatives, researchers want action. Organizers are asking the scientific community to participate in a work stoppage on Wednesday, June 10 to bring attention to racism in the world of research."

    https://gizmodo.com/scientists-call-for-academic-shutdown-in-support-of-bla-1843944068
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    Alistair said:
    For a country that has votes on so many different things that other places do not, it does not appear to be one of their many strengths.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610
    Andy_JS said:

    I don't think this is a spoof website but it's difficult to tell sometimes.


    "Scientists Call for Academic Shutdown in Support of Black Lives

    White supremacy is baked into science and academia, from racist language in textbooks to a culture that excludes Black scientists from innovating and advancing at the same pace as their colleagues. But rather than more milquetoast statements and diversity initiatives, researchers want action. Organizers are asking the scientific community to participate in a work stoppage on Wednesday, June 10 to bring attention to racism in the world of research."

    https://gizmodo.com/scientists-call-for-academic-shutdown-in-support-of-bla-1843944068



    Academics to stage Strike for Black Lives, ShutDownSTEM on 10 June

    https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.6.2.20200608a/full/
  • Options
    StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-52977088

    Earlier many on PB were saying that statues should be removed via the proper channels, and that protesters tearing down Colston's statue would lead to a wave of further statues being torn down by mob rule.

    In reality we seem to have an interesting synthesis in which protesters tearing down Colston's statue is leading to a wave of further statues being torn down... through the proper channels.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
    True, the SNP at the time were rather keener on Mr Hitler's vision of Europe.
  • Options
    StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    Actually it's completely normal.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,269
    Andy_JS said:
    You playing twitter statue bingo?

    By morning, you could have found a tweet for every statue in the UK.
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
    Perhaps the only conceivable positive of our losing WW2 would have been the hilarious experience of people who call Winston Churchill a fascist coming face to face with real fascists. They'd have had a rude awokening, and no mistake.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,304
    eadric said:

    kle4 said:

    eadric said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Maybe. I doubt it.

    But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets

    A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
    I don't think there will be violence in the streets defending statues of some people. Resistance, I am sure, so I don't think Churchill for instance is in danger within 3 years, but the 'must fall' people are just more determined and driven. Take out a few by vandalism and, due to the target, watch them not get replaced. Watch others then get removed as a precaution against vandalism. Then see vandalism against more 'mainstream' figures, and cries of it going too far, maybe replacing those ones. But they'll be back. They want it so much more, and are so righteous.
    Oh yes, I quite agree.

    "The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity."

    From the Second Coming by Yeats, which was, inter alia, written in reaction to his wife nearly dying in the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918

    But in the end these convulsive movements do suddenly and brutally collapse - in general. Look at ISIS, or the French Terror, or the Cultural Revolution. There's a cycle of growing wildness and weirdness, than an abrupt end. And the extremists left at the end usually come to a sticky conclusion.

    Let us hope that the UK's conclusion is legal and political, jail time maybe, and not street thuggery and physical revenge (which I fear is highly possible)
    Tommy Robinson is leading an EDL march in London on Saturday, I hope it does not get violent
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,304
    Andy_JS said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Boris gets a pass from his voters even if there is a second wave

    Has there been new polling?
    See the thread header, 56% of Tory voters blame the public if there is a second wave
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    eadric said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Maybe. I doubt it.

    But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets

    A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
    If Churchill is the firewall, there are going to be a lot of empty pilths before they get to him.
    One would assume so but that fails to take account of the morons deciding the running order
  • Options
    flizzyflizzy Posts: 11
    Bring them down. All of them. Colston, Nelson, Churchill, Gandhi, Faucett, Mandela, the lot. We have a saying, 'don't put people on pedestals'. Then what do we do? We literally go and put people on pedestals!

    No-one's perfect, not by the standards of their own time, and, as is repeatedly pointed out, certainly not by those of the future.

    But there's another problem as well that's been ignored, but I heard, I think during a R4 programme at the time of Rhodes must fall. It's not just a question of who gets a statue but of who doesn't. Wilberforce is most definitely on the right side of history; he dedicated his life to fighting Atlantic slavery. But so did many Africans and former slaves, taking far greater risks to do so than him. Yet there are no statues of them, in many cases their names are completely lost to history. So by putting up a statue to Wilberforce and not them we are inadvertently amplifying the racism of the time.

    So I guess we can leave the statues of the Unknown Soldier. And put up ones to the Unknown Slave, or the Unknown Suffragist/ette, or even the Unknown Prime Minister?

    However, I'm not liking the equivocation with Marx's gravestone. The bar for getting a statue is very very high, the bar for getting a gravestone is very very low, so I'd let gravestones stand.

    Hello everyone, I've been lurking here since June 2016, and reading headers for a while longer.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,644
    Alistair said:
    Trump can win by preventing a free and fair election.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981

    Actually it's completely normal.
    Is it? Why?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
    Perhaps the only conceivable positive of our losing WW2 would have been the hilarious experience of people who call Winston Churchill a fascist coming face to face with real fascists. They'd have had a rude awokening, and no mistake.
    All of these people would be in the SS conducting purity tests and ensuring no one strayed too far from national socialist doctrine.
  • Options
    StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Actually it's completely normal.
    Is it? Why?
    I don't mean tyre slashing in particular, I mean these kinds of acts by the police in the US.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    flizzy said:

    Bring them down. All of them. Colston, Nelson, Churchill, Gandhi, Faucett, Mandela, the lot. We have a saying, 'don't put people on pedestals'. Then what do we do? We literally go and put people on pedestals!

    No-one's perfect, not by the standards of their own time, and, as is repeatedly pointed out, certainly not by those of the future.

    But there's another problem as well that's been ignored, but I heard, I think during a R4 programme at the time of Rhodes must fall. It's not just a question of who gets a statue but of who doesn't. Wilberforce is most definitely on the right side of history; he dedicated his life to fighting Atlantic slavery. But so did many Africans and former slaves, taking far greater risks to do so than him. Yet there are no statues of them, in many cases their names are completely lost to history. So by putting up a statue to Wilberforce and not them we are inadvertently amplifying the racism of the time.

    So I guess we can leave the statues of the Unknown Soldier. And put up ones to the Unknown Slave, or the Unknown Suffragist/ette, or even the Unknown Prime Minister?

    However, I'm not liking the equivocation with Marx's gravestone. The bar for getting a statue is very very high, the bar for getting a gravestone is very very low, so I'd let gravestones stand.

    Hello everyone, I've been lurking here since June 2016, and reading headers for a while longer.

    Welcome, and a thought-provoking post to start off with.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.

    In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
    But you obviously remember them well.
    Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.

    A lot of comedy dates very badly.

    The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981

    This is bizzare:

    twitter.com/NickKristof/status/1270109959636779008?s=20

    Actually it's completely normal.
    Is it? Why?
    I don't mean tyre slashing in particular, I mean these kinds of acts by the police in the US.
    Well then, it just goes to show how out of control the police are in the US
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610
    HYUFD said:

    eadric said:

    kle4 said:

    eadric said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Maybe. I doubt it.

    But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets

    A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
    I don't think there will be violence in the streets defending statues of some people. Resistance, I am sure, so I don't think Churchill for instance is in danger within 3 years, but the 'must fall' people are just more determined and driven. Take out a few by vandalism and, due to the target, watch them not get replaced. Watch others then get removed as a precaution against vandalism. Then see vandalism against more 'mainstream' figures, and cries of it going too far, maybe replacing those ones. But they'll be back. They want it so much more, and are so righteous.
    Oh yes, I quite agree.

    "The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity."

    From the Second Coming by Yeats, which was, inter alia, written in reaction to his wife nearly dying in the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918

    But in the end these convulsive movements do suddenly and brutally collapse - in general. Look at ISIS, or the French Terror, or the Cultural Revolution. There's a cycle of growing wildness and weirdness, than an abrupt end. And the extremists left at the end usually come to a sticky conclusion.

    Let us hope that the UK's conclusion is legal and political, jail time maybe, and not street thuggery and physical revenge (which I fear is highly possible)
    Tommy Robinson is leading an EDL march in London on Saturday, I hope it does not get violent
    Surely there is some kind of psychological term for this? Snap back? One week everyone is cowering in their homes terrified of dying of the plague and demanding their government lock them down.

    Next it is open warfare on the streets, mass protests, marches...
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    I saw a post here the other day by someone comparing pneumonia deaths normally and this year in Florida, versus COVID19 deaths in Florida, that appears to show that COVID deaths are getting recorded as pneumonia there. Does anyone have the figures or a source, I can't find anything..
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    flizzy said:

    Bring them down. All of them. Colston, Nelson, Churchill, Gandhi, Faucett, Mandela, the lot. We have a saying, 'don't put people on pedestals'. Then what do we do? We literally go and put people on pedestals!

    No-one's perfect, not by the standards of their own time, and, as is repeatedly pointed out, certainly not by those of the future.

    But there's another problem as well that's been ignored, but I heard, I think during a R4 programme at the time of Rhodes must fall. It's not just a question of who gets a statue but of who doesn't. Wilberforce is most definitely on the right side of history; he dedicated his life to fighting Atlantic slavery. But so did many Africans and former slaves, taking far greater risks to do so than him. Yet there are no statues of them, in many cases their names are completely lost to history. So by putting up a statue to Wilberforce and not them we are inadvertently amplifying the racism of the time.

    So I guess we can leave the statues of the Unknown Soldier. And put up ones to the Unknown Slave, or the Unknown Suffragist/ette, or even the Unknown Prime Minister?

    However, I'm not liking the equivocation with Marx's gravestone. The bar for getting a statue is very very high, the bar for getting a gravestone is very very low, so I'd let gravestones stand.

    Hello everyone, I've been lurking here since June 2016, and reading headers for a while longer.

    I think people unknown to history not getting statues is unfortunate but does not make the statues of people who did grand things amplifications of racism. I think that sort of approach diminishes the good that was done by undercutting it. There certainly are monuments in existence recognising general concepts or groups, and I think an expansion of the Unknown Soldier concept you suggest is a good one.

    But given changing cultural morals over time a lot of 'good' people then become problematic later, but then might be revisited with positivity yet later still, and the only solution to that being anonymised or conceptual statues seems disproportionate.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    flizzy said:

    Bring them down. All of them. Colston, Nelson, Churchill, Gandhi, Faucett, Mandela, the lot. We have a saying, 'don't put people on pedestals'. Then what do we do? We literally go and put people on pedestals!

    No-one's perfect, not by the standards of their own time, and, as is repeatedly pointed out, certainly not by those of the future.

    But there's another problem as well that's been ignored, but I heard, I think during a R4 programme at the time of Rhodes must fall. It's not just a question of who gets a statue but of who doesn't. Wilberforce is most definitely on the right side of history; he dedicated his life to fighting Atlantic slavery. But so did many Africans and former slaves, taking far greater risks to do so than him. Yet there are no statues of them, in many cases their names are completely lost to history. So by putting up a statue to Wilberforce and not them we are inadvertently amplifying the racism of the time.

    So I guess we can leave the statues of the Unknown Soldier. And put up ones to the Unknown Slave, or the Unknown Suffragist/ette, or even the Unknown Prime Minister?

    However, I'm not liking the equivocation with Marx's gravestone. The bar for getting a statue is very very high, the bar for getting a gravestone is very very low, so I'd let gravestones stand.

    Hello everyone, I've been lurking here since June 2016, and reading headers for a while longer.

    Welcome into the light ;)
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,032

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
    Who called out the troops on the miners, left the Australians in the lurch in two World wars, gassed and bombed the Kurds and whose main reason for the wilderness years was opposition to Indian self government? Beats me!

    Count me in the mixed opinion group.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,684
    eadric said:

    flizzy said:

    Bring them down. All of them. Colston, Nelson, Churchill, Gandhi, Faucett, Mandela, the lot. We have a saying, 'don't put people on pedestals'. Then what do we do? We literally go and put people on pedestals!

    No-one's perfect, not by the standards of their own time, and, as is repeatedly pointed out, certainly not by those of the future.

    But there's another problem as well that's been ignored, but I heard, I think during a R4 programme at the time of Rhodes must fall. It's not just a question of who gets a statue but of who doesn't. Wilberforce is most definitely on the right side of history; he dedicated his life to fighting Atlantic slavery. But so did many Africans and former slaves, taking far greater risks to do so than him. Yet there are no statues of them, in many cases their names are completely lost to history. So by putting up a statue to Wilberforce and not them we are inadvertently amplifying the racism of the time.

    So I guess we can leave the statues of the Unknown Soldier. And put up ones to the Unknown Slave, or the Unknown Suffragist/ette, or even the Unknown Prime Minister?

    However, I'm not liking the equivocation with Marx's gravestone. The bar for getting a statue is very very high, the bar for getting a gravestone is very very low, so I'd let gravestones stand.

    Hello everyone, I've been lurking here since June 2016, and reading headers for a while longer.

    Amazing, Marx can stay. Well well well

    But welcome, nonetheless
    It's also not an ordinary gravestone in an ordinary graveyard. More than happy to have it moved to different cemetery with an ordinary gravestone though if we're dumping everything...
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    OMFG, I joked the other day that knowing Trump it would be Stephen Miller writing the unity and race relations speech.

    AND IT ONLY FUCKING IS

    https://twitter.com/AprilDRyan/status/1270433974934999041?s=19
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,189
    Useless fact; today is the anniversary of the 1983 general election.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,339
    HYUFD said:

    eadric said:

    kle4 said:

    eadric said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Maybe. I doubt it.

    But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets

    A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
    I don't think there will be violence in the streets defending statues of some people. Resistance, I am sure, so I don't think Churchill for instance is in danger within 3 years, but the 'must fall' people are just more determined and driven. Take out a few by vandalism and, due to the target, watch them not get replaced. Watch others then get removed as a precaution against vandalism. Then see vandalism against more 'mainstream' figures, and cries of it going too far, maybe replacing those ones. But they'll be back. They want it so much more, and are so righteous.
    Oh yes, I quite agree.

    "The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity."

    From the Second Coming by Yeats, which was, inter alia, written in reaction to his wife nearly dying in the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918

    But in the end these convulsive movements do suddenly and brutally collapse - in general. Look at ISIS, or the French Terror, or the Cultural Revolution. There's a cycle of growing wildness and weirdness, than an abrupt end. And the extremists left at the end usually come to a sticky conclusion.

    Let us hope that the UK's conclusion is legal and political, jail time maybe, and not street thuggery and physical revenge (which I fear is highly possible)
    Tommy Robinson is leading an EDL march in London on Saturday, I hope it does not get violent
    Are the EDL still a thing? I thought they had gone the way of the BNP. Isnt it all Britain First and whatever those footy fans one is called these days?

  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,420

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
    Perhaps the only conceivable positive of our losing WW2 would have been the hilarious experience of people who call Winston Churchill a fascist coming face to face with real fascists. They'd have had a rude awokening, and no mistake.
    Now is not the time to examine what people actually said, it's time to indulge in some squirrely shit about imagining losing the war.

    It's always that other time, isn't it.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.

    In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
    But you obviously remember them well.
    Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.

    A lot of comedy dates very badly.

    The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
    Really? So if I don't laugh at a Shakespearean comedy it's not that it's hundreds of years old and perhaps not as guffaw worthy as it was then, it's simply no longer a comedy?
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    alterego said:

    CatMan said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    I should have said 2008, since that's when it finished.

    But yes, I agree with you.
    Can't remember a single episode that made me laugh once.
    You obviously watched them all to make sure. 😉
    I'm always fair.
    And suffering for it obviously
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,339

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Who in their right mind couldn't endorse Keep England White Winnie?
    Perhaps the only conceivable positive of our losing WW2 would have been the hilarious experience of people who call Winston Churchill a fascist coming face to face with real fascists. They'd have had a rude awokening, and no mistake.
    It was only a week ago the twatter-sphere was full of photos of Churchill.as an anti-fascist in support of ANTIFA...now he must be cancelled.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    I've always felt the Tomb of Karl Marx has a very Wizard of Oz feel to it, not sure why.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    I saw a post here the other day by someone comparing pneumonia deaths normally and this year in Florida, versus COVID19 deaths in Florida, that appears to show that COVID deaths are getting recorded as pneumonia there. Does anyone have the figures or a source, I can't find anything..

    There have been numerous mutterings about Florida's Covid tracking numbers. A couple of weeks ago the person in charge of the main public facing dashboard had the responsibility taken from her.

    I haven't looked at the issue in depth.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,032

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Boris gets a pass from his voters even if there is a second wave

    I was in this Yougov.

    I blame the public and government equally, not least because the public elected a government of fuckwits!
    Perhaps this is all part of regaining control? :D:D
    For a government all about "taking back control" this seems to be one that is unusually chaotic.

    I am in the gap between children and grandchildren, so have no skin in the game, but it really is clown car stuff over schools.

  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    kle4 said:

    I've always felt the Tomb of Karl Marx has a very Wizard of Oz feel to it, not sure why.

    I always thought it was a Communist plot ;)

    I will get my hat & coat....
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,644

    I saw a post here the other day by someone comparing pneumonia deaths normally and this year in Florida, versus COVID19 deaths in Florida, that appears to show that COVID deaths are getting recorded as pneumonia there. Does anyone have the figures or a source, I can't find anything..

    I saw a fact check on that.

    https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/03/facebook-posts/claim-florida-undercounting-covid-19-deaths-uses-f/

    Seems like it was a (wilful?) misunderstanding of the way cause of death is recorded, and some curiosities thereof.
  • Options
    flizzyflizzy Posts: 11
    MaxPB said:

    eadric said:

    flizzy said:

    Bring them down. All of them. Colston, Nelson, Churchill, Gandhi, Faucett, Mandela, the lot. We have a saying, 'don't put people on pedestals'. Then what do we do? We literally go and put people on pedestals!

    No-one's perfect, not by the standards of their own time, and, as is repeatedly pointed out, certainly not by those of the future.

    But there's another problem as well that's been ignored, but I heard, I think during a R4 programme at the time of Rhodes must fall. It's not just a question of who gets a statue but of who doesn't. Wilberforce is most definitely on the right side of history; he dedicated his life to fighting Atlantic slavery. But so did many Africans and former slaves, taking far greater risks to do so than him. Yet there are no statues of them, in many cases their names are completely lost to history. So by putting up a statue to Wilberforce and not them we are inadvertently amplifying the racism of the time.

    So I guess we can leave the statues of the Unknown Soldier. And put up ones to the Unknown Slave, or the Unknown Suffragist/ette, or even the Unknown Prime Minister?

    However, I'm not liking the equivocation with Marx's gravestone. The bar for getting a statue is very very high, the bar for getting a gravestone is very very low, so I'd let gravestones stand.

    Hello everyone, I've been lurking here since June 2016, and reading headers for a while longer.

    Amazing, Marx can stay. Well well well

    But welcome, nonetheless
    It's also not an ordinary gravestone in an ordinary graveyard. More than happy to have it moved to different cemetery with an ordinary gravestone though if we're dumping everything...
    That isn't political favouritism - economically, I'm much more Blairite than Marxist! If Colston has a gravestone somewhere I've no objection to that staying either. I guess we'd have to consider whether elaborate gravestones should be allowed or whether they need to be swapped for plainer ones.

    Thanks for the welcome everyone.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,032
    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.

    In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
    But you obviously remember them well.
    Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.

    A lot of comedy dates very badly.

    The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
    A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.

    A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    I've seen this before on her but not anywhere on MSM - strange?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,339
    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.

    In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
    But you obviously remember them well.
    Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.

    A lot of comedy dates very badly.

    The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
    A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.

    A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
    Friends is still so popular it was responsible for a significant proportion of all viewing hours when it was on Netflix....discuss...
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,189
    flizzy said:

    Bring them down. All of them. Colston, Nelson, Churchill, Gandhi, Faucett, Mandela, the lot. We have a saying, 'don't put people on pedestals'. Then what do we do? We literally go and put people on pedestals!

    No-one's perfect, not by the standards of their own time, and, as is repeatedly pointed out, certainly not by those of the future.

    But there's another problem as well that's been ignored, but I heard, I think during a R4 programme at the time of Rhodes must fall. It's not just a question of who gets a statue but of who doesn't. Wilberforce is most definitely on the right side of history; he dedicated his life to fighting Atlantic slavery. But so did many Africans and former slaves, taking far greater risks to do so than him. Yet there are no statues of them, in many cases their names are completely lost to history. So by putting up a statue to Wilberforce and not them we are inadvertently amplifying the racism of the time.

    So I guess we can leave the statues of the Unknown Soldier. And put up ones to the Unknown Slave, or the Unknown Suffragist/ette, or even the Unknown Prime Minister?

    However, I'm not liking the equivocation with Marx's gravestone. The bar for getting a statue is very very high, the bar for getting a gravestone is very very low, so I'd let gravestones stand.

    Hello everyone, I've been lurking here since June 2016, and reading headers for a while longer.

    Welcome to the site, at least from a posting point of view.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,339

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
    Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
    Not good enough, he is about to be cancelled....
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981

    Friends is still so popular it was responsible for a significant proportion of all viewing hours when it was on Netflix....discuss...

    Friends was dreadfully banal. The British version was way, way funnier.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,526

    I saw a post here the other day by someone comparing pneumonia deaths normally and this year in Florida, versus COVID19 deaths in Florida, that appears to show that COVID deaths are getting recorded as pneumonia there. Does anyone have the figures or a source, I can't find anything..

    It was me.

    Howard Dean, the Former Governor of Vermont, and Owen Graham, a Florida Democrat made the accusations, There seems to be some dispute over whether the accusations are simply partisan or accurate. Someone running the Florida stats has nonetheless been fired.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    MaxPB said:

    eadric said:

    flizzy said:

    Bring them down. All of them. Colston, Nelson, Churchill, Gandhi, Faucett, Mandela, the lot. We have a saying, 'don't put people on pedestals'. Then what do we do? We literally go and put people on pedestals!

    No-one's perfect, not by the standards of their own time, and, as is repeatedly pointed out, certainly not by those of the future.

    But there's another problem as well that's been ignored, but I heard, I think during a R4 programme at the time of Rhodes must fall. It's not just a question of who gets a statue but of who doesn't. Wilberforce is most definitely on the right side of history; he dedicated his life to fighting Atlantic slavery. But so did many Africans and former slaves, taking far greater risks to do so than him. Yet there are no statues of them, in many cases their names are completely lost to history. So by putting up a statue to Wilberforce and not them we are inadvertently amplifying the racism of the time.

    So I guess we can leave the statues of the Unknown Soldier. And put up ones to the Unknown Slave, or the Unknown Suffragist/ette, or even the Unknown Prime Minister?

    However, I'm not liking the equivocation with Marx's gravestone. The bar for getting a statue is very very high, the bar for getting a gravestone is very very low, so I'd let gravestones stand.

    Hello everyone, I've been lurking here since June 2016, and reading headers for a while longer.

    Amazing, Marx can stay. Well well well

    But welcome, nonetheless
    It's also not an ordinary gravestone in an ordinary graveyard. More than happy to have it moved to different cemetery with an ordinary gravestone though if we're dumping everything...
    Ed might be looking for a new one.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    So it looks like Boris gets a pass from his voters even if there is a second wave

    I was in this Yougov.

    I blame the public and government equally, not least because the public elected a government of fuckwits!
    Perhaps this is all part of regaining control? :D:D
    For a government all about "taking back control" this seems to be one that is unusually chaotic.

    I am in the gap between children and grandchildren, so have no skin in the game, but it really is clown car stuff over schools.

    Likewise.

    Based on Cyclefree's recent postings, it seems that our govt cannot even organise brewerys to allow p*ss-ups

    :joy:
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,135
    eadric said:

    I'm hearing claims that the statue of Millligan was protected, as being part of the Grade 1 listed complex of the West India Docks.

    https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1242440

    This was my assumption, which made me legally question Khan's/Tower Hamlets' move, is this even legal?

    The statue was fine, bronze, in context, and 200 years old. Surely protected?

    But maybe a site can be listed yet the integral statues are not? Any lawyers here?

    Trees can be protected by legal orders, I would be astounded if statues around or a part of a historic site cannot as well, though whether they generally are I do not know. But it'd take a member of the public with deep pockets to challenge the legality of any such move I'd bet, so seems unlikely.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,032

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
    Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
    yes, he had a good year in 1940-1.

    He was pretty crap the rest of his career though, henc
  • Options
    TresTres Posts: 2,273

    HYUFD said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    It won't, most voters have a positive view of Churchill, only Labour voters do not.

    However even Labour voters are more mixed in their view of him then negative

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1269896392396484609?s=20
    Weird how the only people not to endorse a literal anti-fascist are the self-styled 'antifascists'...
    Looks quite nuanced to me. Only a tiny proportion take a predominantly negative view. I know people across the spectrum who have mixed feelings about him, though most of us focus mainly on the positive sides.
    Nuanced? This is the man who can quite reasonably be said to have saved European civilisation from what could easily have been a century of barbarism. There's no room for nuance.
    Well my grandparents always held that for all that he was a shit. ymmv
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,610

    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    alterego said:

    Foxy said:

    CatMan said:

    Andy_JS said:
    "Times have changed"?!!!! Since 2003?!!!!!
    I remember it as being hugely repetitive from episode to episode, but also extremely tasteless.
    Comedy is usually patchy. No one reminisces over the filler in Monty Python.

    In the second series in particular the gentle eccentricity gave out to gross out comedy. Ting Tong, Bubbles de Vere, and the vomiting racist WI matrons were not funny.
    But you obviously remember them well.
    Yes, because like much of the country, I watched it. It was popular for a reason.

    A lot of comedy dates very badly.

    The best doesn't date. If it dates it's not comedic.
    A very circular argument of the no true Scotsmen variety.

    A lot of stuff considered hilarious years ago is considered rather lame now. The Goodies for example.
    Friends is still so popular it was responsible for a significant proportion of all viewing hours when it was on Netflix....discuss...
    Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? is timelessly brilliant.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,061
    eadric said:

    kle4 said:

    eadric said:

    houndtang said:

    Andy_JS said:
    The statue of Churchill will be down within 3 years.
    Maybe. I doubt it.

    But if they do try it, expect proper violence in the streets

    A small, evil bit of me wants the worst of them to have a go so they are all beaten into a pulp
    I don't think there will be violence in the streets defending statues of some people. Resistance, I am sure, so I don't think Churchill for instance is in danger within 3 years, but the 'must fall' people are just more determined and driven. Take out a few by vandalism and, due to the target, watch them not get replaced. Watch others then get removed as a precaution against vandalism. Then see vandalism against more 'mainstream' figures, and cries of it going too far, maybe replacing those ones. But they'll be back. They want it so much more, and are so righteous.
    Oh yes, I quite agree.

    "The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity."

    From the Second Coming by Yeats, which was, inter alia, written in reaction to his wife nearly dying in the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918

    But in the end these convulsive movements do suddenly and brutally collapse - in general. Look at ISIS, or the French Terror, or the Cultural Revolution. There's a cycle of growing wildness and weirdness, than an abrupt end. And the extremists left at the end usually come to a sticky conclusion.

    Let us hope that the UK's conclusion is legal and political, jail time maybe, and not street thuggery and physical revenge (which I fear is highly possible)
    You're onto something there. "These convulsive movements do suddenly and brutally collapse."
    Brexiters, Bolsonaro and Trump in government.
    Utterly and viscerally exposed in the apricity of an existential crisis to be entirely and woefully flaccidly impotent.
This discussion has been closed.