Undefined discussion subject.
Comments
-
His 'History has begun' is a book worth reading, if only as a counter to the often assumed transition away from a world dominated by US values. For balance he's also written about the rise of China.kamski said:
Interesting. Although I wonder if American culture is more dominated by stories than any other, maybe it's just the kind of stories that dominate. The difference between Breaking Bad and The Great British Bake Off. "Baking Bad" might make a good TV Show.IanB2 said:
Bruno Macaes argues that American culture is dominated by 'stories' and individual Americans' attitudes by a perception that they are each starring in the film of their own life. He suggests that the emotional attachment to guns arises not so much from the usually argued 'rights and freedoms' but because, in the back of their mind they have a storyline in which life delivers them the chance to become the movie hero who sees off the terrorist or armed robber. The fact that most of them rarely get the gun out of the drawer is by the by.kle4 said:
No matter the history of the nation and why they have the gun rules they have, I will never understand why so many americans love guns as much as they do, where it genuinely seems to be more important than any other issue and mean that they should be able to take and use their guns absolutlely everywhere. Even with a small number of people having a lot of guns and that skewing the average, the tolerance of the actions of those people just beggars belief.DavidL said:
Absolutely. The degree of tolerance given to these gun totting lunatics is just bizarre.rcs1000 said:
I wonder what would have happened if black men with guns had attempted to break into the state house.williamglenn said:The armed wing of the anti-maskers.
https://twitter.com/khennessey/status/1298039192820297729?s=21
I also seem to remember that when the gun is taken out of the drawer it is way more likely to be used on the gun-owner or a member of the same household, than it is on any bad guy or intruder.
He describes America as a culture hugely influenced by film and TV, both of which it has had for longer than anywhere else, and because physical size and remoteness reduced the importance of aspects of European culture (against which there was a counter-reaction after independence in any case - see Degler's classic book on American cultural history). Americans draw much of their self image of what it is to be American directly from film and TV in a way that isn't the case in Europe. He draws similar conclusions (as on guns) about religion, noting that despite wider claimed adherance, society isn't noticeably more Christian in its values (arguably less, in some respects) and the nature of religion in the US downplays the ritual and liturgy of its history and replaces it with aspects of performance and celebrity, drawn from (and sometimes hosted by) the visual media. He concludes many Americans are religious simply because it makes their life storyline more interesting.0 -
And Scottish miners were then slaves in a real sense - bought and sold with the mines,a nd excluded from habeas corpus legislation.IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
http://www.scottishmining.co.uk/8.html
Edit: Here's a serf's collar - |""property of so and so, given by the magistrates".
http://nms.scran.ac.uk/database/record.php?usi=000-100-001-337-C0 -
Um, you are a bit confused. I am not affecting outrage, and if the descendants of the people subject to the provisions of the SC Slave Code stated that they were a bit unhappy about it, I wouldn't describe that as affectation either. There's degrees of irrelevance: A Bicycle Made For Two is outdated, and so is the Horst Wessel song.kle4 said:
Since you don't want to affect outrage on other people's behalf, shall I discount your outrage until those people affect it themselves?IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant.0 -
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.0 -
Does that sub editor know what "putting out to stud" actually means? Electrifying story if so.dr_spyn said:August silly season gossip, or something to ponder over? https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/putting-pm-out-to-stud-mtzzfdvh0
3 -
That probably means 2 or 3 tweets...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.0 -
-
I think some do say that, but a confident nation contests those who seek to find negative meaning in its cultural heritage and uses it to unify instead.IshmaelZ said:
Of course it isn't a *reference* to that trade, nobody says that, but it's a bit unfortunate in the context of that trade. Like setting fire to £20 notes in front of beggars.Casino_Royale said:
Songs, poems, plays and stories that contain words that originally were of their time are regularly re-interpreted for today without taking a poleaxe to them.tlg86 said:
They've been outdated for 50 years FFS.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
In fact, that's already happening in reverse by the detractors because they're assuming "Britons never never never shall be slaves" is a reference to the transatlantic slave trade, whereas in fact it was a defiant call of the distinctiveness of Britain in moving toward constitutional monarchy, in contrast to Royal absolutism in Europe, and an exhortation to fund the navy properly to defend Britain against it.
It gained currency during the War of the Austrian Succession, when Britain was at war with both France and Spain, who are the "tyrants" referred to within it.0 -
Given the way some farmers extract the fluid required, most certainly potentially electrifying.IshmaelZ said:
Does that sub editor know what "putting out to stud" actually means? Electrifying story if so.dr_spyn said:August silly season gossip, or something to ponder over? https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/putting-pm-out-to-stud-mtzzfdvh0
0 -
Your protestation that you are not affecting outrage is not very convincing. If I said 'I am not one to complain about X, but here's my difficulty with X', I think it would be pretty clear what I was doing, despite my attempt to claim otherwise. I don't agree the phrase 'ignore everything before the but' applies universally, however it often does.IshmaelZ said:
Um, you are a bit confused. I am not affecting outrage, and if the descendants of the people subject to the provisions of the SC Slave Code stated that they were a bit unhappy about it, I wouldn't describe that as affectation either. There's degrees of irrelevance: A Bicycle Made For Two is outdated, and so is the Horst Wessel song.kle4 said:
Since you don't want to affect outrage on other people's behalf, shall I discount your outrage until those people affect it themselves?IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant.
And I did not suggest 'affecting outrage' would be a false affectation, so I think you should check yourself before accusing others of being confused.
Pleasant day to all.0 -
More likely he's hinting it's a load of bull.IshmaelZ said:
Does that sub editor know what "putting out to stud" actually means? Electrifying story if so.dr_spyn said:August silly season gossip, or something to ponder over? https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/putting-pm-out-to-stud-mtzzfdvh0
0 -
Of course the boat race should be allowed to continue, however its members wish to do so. Has anyone suggested differently?IshmaelZ said:
They don't, there is nothing to stop any other two universities from challenging each other to an annual rowing match and I imagine the Thames would be made available for the appropriate fee.nichomar said:
Who said anything about slaves? Why should Oxbridge have these privileges over other universities?moonshine said:
Does the popularity of these events not “suggest” to you that there remains a place for them? What’s with people these days feeling it’s their right to “suggest” to other people how they should and shouldn’t spend their leisure time and money. It’s not like a rowing race or rugby match exploits slaves like at the colosseum. Get over yourself.nichomar said:
I didn’t demand just suggested that it should be, same with the farcity cricket at Lords and Rugby at Twickenham.moonshine said:
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?nichomar said:
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.Malmesbury said:
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
Should the license fee payers promote it is an entirely different question and arguable. On balance enough people watch it that they should do imo, but its a proper question and not clearcut unlike should it be allowed to happen.0 -
Indeed, and sometimes it is found by a child and "used" as a toy. In either case the gun owner does get to live out a storyline, just a different one from that which they imagined.kamski said:
Interesting. Although I wonder if American culture is more dominated by stories than any other, maybe it's just the kind of stories that dominate. The difference between Breaking Bad and The Great British Bake Off. "Baking Bad" might make a good TV Show.IanB2 said:
Bruno Macaes argues that American culture is dominated by 'stories' and individual Americans' attitudes by a perception that they are each starring in the film of their own life. He suggests that the emotional attachment to guns arises not so much from the usually argued 'rights and freedoms' but because, in the back of their mind they have a storyline in which life delivers them the chance to become the movie hero who sees off the terrorist or armed robber. The fact that most of them rarely get the gun out of the drawer is by the by.kle4 said:
No matter the history of the nation and why they have the gun rules they have, I will never understand why so many americans love guns as much as they do, where it genuinely seems to be more important than any other issue and mean that they should be able to take and use their guns absolutlely everywhere. Even with a small number of people having a lot of guns and that skewing the average, the tolerance of the actions of those people just beggars belief.DavidL said:
Absolutely. The degree of tolerance given to these gun totting lunatics is just bizarre.rcs1000 said:
I wonder what would have happened if black men with guns had attempted to break into the state house.williamglenn said:The armed wing of the anti-maskers.
https://twitter.com/khennessey/status/1298039192820297729?s=21
I also seem to remember that when the gun is taken out of the drawer it is way more likely to be used on the gun-owner or a member of the same household, than it is on any bad guy or intruder.
1 -
Interesting to note that the Panzerlied is still sung. In Namibia.....IshmaelZ said:
Um, you are a bit confused. I am not affecting outrage, and if the descendants of the people subject to the provisions of the SC Slave Code stated that they were a bit unhappy about it, I wouldn't describe that as affectation either. There's degrees of irrelevance: A Bicycle Made For Two is outdated, and so is the Horst Wessel song.kle4 said:
Since you don't want to affect outrage on other people's behalf, shall I discount your outrage until those people affect it themselves?IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant.0 -
They like the forwarded clips with comments on Twitter... doesn’t that count...tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.0 -
Affectation is by definition false; that's what the word means. I am saying what I genuinely think, and when I say that I think something is on balance a bad thing rather than a good one that is not the same as being outraged about it.kle4 said:
Your protestation that you are not affecting outrage is not very convincing. If I said 'I am not one to complain about X, but here's my difficulty with X', I think it would be pretty clear what I was doing, despite my attempt to claim otherwise. I don't agree the phrase 'ignore everything before the but' applies universally, however it often does.IshmaelZ said:
Um, you are a bit confused. I am not affecting outrage, and if the descendants of the people subject to the provisions of the SC Slave Code stated that they were a bit unhappy about it, I wouldn't describe that as affectation either. There's degrees of irrelevance: A Bicycle Made For Two is outdated, and so is the Horst Wessel song.kle4 said:
Since you don't want to affect outrage on other people's behalf, shall I discount your outrage until those people affect it themselves?IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant.
And I did not suggest 'affecting outrage' would be a false affectation, so I think you should check yourself before accusing others of being confused.
Pleasant day to all.0 -
Yes, slavery was awful - and that's why an abolitionist campaign developed in Britain in the late 18th Century (ironically, this song helped as the campaigners were able to point out the inconsistencies) - and then it was ceased, phased out and then stamped out.IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
The song is a celebration of independent Britishness and freedom that is still relevant today, and I can see it being even more so in future if China becomes ever more powerful in the geopolitical and economic space such that it starts to impinge on our freedoms rather than us supinely surrendering to it.4 -
They have basically said that the changes are because of COVID.tlg86 said:
I don't think there's anything wrong with the changes for this year. But the BBC are giving the impression that the changes are being made because of BLM not COVID-19 (or planes crashing into buildings as in 2001).Stuartinromford said:
"Give it to another broadcaster." You are joking, right?Luckyguy1983 said:
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
The Proms in their current form are a BBC thing. Yes, there's the lineage back to Henry Wood, but without the BBC there's nothing for another broadcaster to broadcast. They're planned by BBC people, and the main performers are BBC orchestras.
There's nothing stopping Sky or Classic FM broadcasting an evening concert of patriotic songs, apart from orchestras being awfully expensive things and live classical music being a bit of a niche market. So bluntly, no BBC, no Proms.
And besides, the pathetic moralism is just as likely on the side of the Beeb bashers. This year, the last night won't have a big raucous audience, so the usual Last Night fun would look and sound a bit pathetic, like wearing a clown suit to choral evensong. There's also a fair question about whether this is a year to have this particular bit of fun, or whether- like in 2001- we need something a bit different.
Artistically, they've probably got it about right.
And that it will return to what it was next year (assuming the virus problem is gone).0 -
On the boat race -IshmaelZ said:
They don't, there is nothing to stop any other two universities from challenging each other to an annual rowing match and I imagine the Thames would be made available for the appropriate fee.nichomar said:
Who said anything about slaves? Why should Oxbridge have these privileges over other universities?moonshine said:
Does the popularity of these events not “suggest” to you that there remains a place for them? What’s with people these days feeling it’s their right to “suggest” to other people how they should and shouldn’t spend their leisure time and money. It’s not like a rowing race or rugby match exploits slaves like at the colosseum. Get over yourself.nichomar said:
I didn’t demand just suggested that it should be, same with the farcity cricket at Lords and Rugby at Twickenham.moonshine said:
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?nichomar said:
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.Malmesbury said:
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
- due to the unique format of the race, taking place over a long, winding course on a tidal river, there is no interest from other universities for taking part. Modern rowing training (like all athletic training) is finely tuned. Everyone else in rowing is training for 2000m, over a straight course, in flat water.
- it would be quite hard to row with a half dozen competitors - despite the width of the Thames, the "good" line is quite narrow. Unlike other rowing, the idea is to get in front of your opponent and block the "good" line. With multiple competitors, collisions would be almost inevitable.0 -
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.0 -
1
-
In German South West Africa from the POV of those who sing it, presumably.Malmesbury said:
Interesting to note that the Panzerlied is still sung. In Namibia.....IshmaelZ said:
Um, you are a bit confused. I am not affecting outrage, and if the descendants of the people subject to the provisions of the SC Slave Code stated that they were a bit unhappy about it, I wouldn't describe that as affectation either. There's degrees of irrelevance: A Bicycle Made For Two is outdated, and so is the Horst Wessel song.kle4 said:
Since you don't want to affect outrage on other people's behalf, shall I discount your outrage until those people affect it themselves?IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant.0 -
In terms of drawing parallels with Trump, you have to go back to 20th century politicians before you get even close. Mussolini seems to me to represent the closest parallel. Trump has absolutely no respect for democratic norms, and would clearly stop at absolutely nothing to remain in power given the opportunity. Economic nationalism, contempt for democracy, disrespect even for human life, creation of a parallel universe of political untruths, cult of the individual, it's all there. You're seeing 21st century Fascism unfold before your eyes in all but name.Nigelb said:
Not even close.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Boris is the British Trump, both in terms of charisma and casual disregard for rules and norms. I imagine Labour and Conservative Party workers will be closely examining this campaign for that reason (and not just because they always do).RobD said:
I mean people were shy about voting for John Major. He's got nothing on TrumpMarqueeMark said:
I also suspect an expression of that fear is not admitting in public - even to pollsters - that they put their faith in Trump to be the guy to best look after them. Sure, Trump is an idiot. But he's their idiot....MrEd said:As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
It's just not something you admit to.
True there are some parallels, but while Johnson shares the narcissism, it’s not combined with the same raging egomania or megalomania.
Johnson has limits; Trump has none.1 -
Cambridge itself, with a very narrow river, solves the problem with “the bumps”, whereby all the competing boats start off in line, and you advance position by catching or bumping the boat in front.Malmesbury said:
On the boat race -IshmaelZ said:
They don't, there is nothing to stop any other two universities from challenging each other to an annual rowing match and I imagine the Thames would be made available for the appropriate fee.nichomar said:
Who said anything about slaves? Why should Oxbridge have these privileges over other universities?moonshine said:
Does the popularity of these events not “suggest” to you that there remains a place for them? What’s with people these days feeling it’s their right to “suggest” to other people how they should and shouldn’t spend their leisure time and money. It’s not like a rowing race or rugby match exploits slaves like at the colosseum. Get over yourself.nichomar said:
I didn’t demand just suggested that it should be, same with the farcity cricket at Lords and Rugby at Twickenham.moonshine said:
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?nichomar said:
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.Malmesbury said:
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
- due to the unique format of the race, taking place over a long, winding course on a tidal river, there is no interest from other universities for taking part. Modern rowing training (like all athletic training) is finely tuned. Everyone else in rowing is training for 2000m, over a straight course, in flat water.
- it would be quite hard to row with a half dozen competitors - despite the width of the Thames, the "good" line is quite narrow. Unlike other rowing, the idea is to get in front of your opponent and block the "good" line. With multiple competitors, collisions would be almost inevitable.
Extrapolating, a gaggle of other universities could be allowed to compete by starting off some yards back from Oxford and Cambridge, and if any of them manage to catch the boat in second place, they get to be one of the top two the year following?0 -
It is an important distinction. Why cant people question something without being assumed of being outraged by it, told to not watch it and accused of wanting to ban it.IshmaelZ said:
Affectation is by definition false; that's what the word means. I am saying what I genuinely think, and when I say that I think something is on balance a bad thing rather than a good one that is not the same as being outraged about it.kle4 said:
Your protestation that you are not affecting outrage is not very convincing. If I said 'I am not one to complain about X, but here's my difficulty with X', I think it would be pretty clear what I was doing, despite my attempt to claim otherwise. I don't agree the phrase 'ignore everything before the but' applies universally, however it often does.IshmaelZ said:
Um, you are a bit confused. I am not affecting outrage, and if the descendants of the people subject to the provisions of the SC Slave Code stated that they were a bit unhappy about it, I wouldn't describe that as affectation either. There's degrees of irrelevance: A Bicycle Made For Two is outdated, and so is the Horst Wessel song.kle4 said:
Since you don't want to affect outrage on other people's behalf, shall I discount your outrage until those people affect it themselves?IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant.
And I did not suggest 'affecting outrage' would be a false affectation, so I think you should check yourself before accusing others of being confused.
Pleasant day to all.
I think eventually those songs will be replaced but its probably 20 years away or so, when there is broader support for the change amongst those who go.
Whilst traditions obviously are based on keeping a lot of things similar, they also change and adapt as everything else does. Xmas in 2020 is very different to that in 1970 which is in turn different to that in 1920, but they are all stall Xmas.0 -
Also is there an objective standard?TOPPING said:
*DISCLAIMER FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING AN ARGUMENTATIVE SOD ON PB*IanB2 said:
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.Luckyguy1983 said:
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
Who is to say what is offensive?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Hope_and_Glory
Take Land of Hope and Glory. The actual *words* are inoffensive - the argument has to be on the implied sentiments, which seems challenging2 -
It gets pretty close, actually.Casino_Royale said:
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.
I'm a great one for compromise, and I think we can resolve this to the satisfaction of everyone by tacitly dropping RB and introducing John Peel in its place.0 -
God help us , now we are going to sing Land of Hope and Glory to the Chinese as they buy up what will be left of the UK or generally tweak our noses and laugh at us. Great idea.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, slavery was awful - and that's why an abolitionist campaign developed in Britain in the late 18th Century (ironically, this song helped as the campaigners were able to point out the inconsistencies) - and then it was ceased, phased out and then stamped out.IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
The song is a celebration of independent Britishness and freedom that is still relevant today, and I can see it being even more so in future if China becomes ever more powerful in the geopolitical and economic space such that it starts to impinge on our freedoms rather than us supinely surrendering to it.0 -
Some of your fellow Britons think it does and find it offensive. Are their concerns meaningless to you?Casino_Royale said:
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.1 -
I was being somewhat facetious (moi?!), but I believe it's on the rise everywhere.kle4 said:
I know there are countries where that is certainly the case, but is it in the USA?Theuniondivvie said:
And why skin lightening agents are big business.0 -
Quite. However, it is also sung (or used to be) in the French army. Translated and modified a bit..IshmaelZ said:
In German South West Africa from the POV of those who sing it, presumably.Malmesbury said:
Interesting to note that the Panzerlied is still sung. In Namibia.....IshmaelZ said:
Um, you are a bit confused. I am not affecting outrage, and if the descendants of the people subject to the provisions of the SC Slave Code stated that they were a bit unhappy about it, I wouldn't describe that as affectation either. There's degrees of irrelevance: A Bicycle Made For Two is outdated, and so is the Horst Wessel song.kle4 said:
Since you don't want to affect outrage on other people's behalf, shall I discount your outrage until those people affect it themselves?IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant.
They had to drop a bridge on a few people to stop it in the German army, IIRC0 -
It doesn't because "Briton" wasn't racially defined then - it was geographic. Later that definition changed and Briton became broader to encompass the whole Empire and co-terminus with the fact slavery had been abolished throughout.IshmaelZ said:
It gets pretty close, actually.Casino_Royale said:
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.
I'm a great one for compromise, and I think we can resolve this to the satisfaction of everyone by tacitly dropping RB and introducing John Peel in its place.
We're retrospectively ascribing negative sentiments to it.1 -
Is that an admission that independence ain't happening Malc?malcolmg said:
God help us , now we are going to sing Land of Hope and Glory to the Chinese as they buy up what will be left of the UK or generally tweak our noses and laugh at us. Great idea.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, slavery was awful - and that's why an abolitionist campaign developed in Britain in the late 18th Century (ironically, this song helped as the campaigners were able to point out the inconsistencies) - and then it was ceased, phased out and then stamped out.IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
The song is a celebration of independent Britishness and freedom that is still relevant today, and I can see it being even more so in future if China becomes ever more powerful in the geopolitical and economic space such that it starts to impinge on our freedoms rather than us supinely surrendering to it.
0 -
Okay, good to know. That said, I'm not quite as positive about the situation regarding COVID as some on here are.Nigelb said:
They have basically said that the changes are because of COVID.tlg86 said:
I don't think there's anything wrong with the changes for this year. But the BBC are giving the impression that the changes are being made because of BLM not COVID-19 (or planes crashing into buildings as in 2001).Stuartinromford said:
"Give it to another broadcaster." You are joking, right?Luckyguy1983 said:
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
The Proms in their current form are a BBC thing. Yes, there's the lineage back to Henry Wood, but without the BBC there's nothing for another broadcaster to broadcast. They're planned by BBC people, and the main performers are BBC orchestras.
There's nothing stopping Sky or Classic FM broadcasting an evening concert of patriotic songs, apart from orchestras being awfully expensive things and live classical music being a bit of a niche market. So bluntly, no BBC, no Proms.
And besides, the pathetic moralism is just as likely on the side of the Beeb bashers. This year, the last night won't have a big raucous audience, so the usual Last Night fun would look and sound a bit pathetic, like wearing a clown suit to choral evensong. There's also a fair question about whether this is a year to have this particular bit of fun, or whether- like in 2001- we need something a bit different.
Artistically, they've probably got it about right.
And that it will return to what it was next year (assuming the virus problem is gone).0 -
I always thought it was rules the waves apparently notCasino_Royale said:
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.
It is strongly associated with the Royal Navy – yet at the time, the song was not a celebration of the success of naval affairs, but a cry for help.
Written in 1740 Britain did not yet ‘rule the waves’, and the Royal Navy didn’t yet have the dominant power on the oceans
"Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never will be slaves."1 -
There are bump races at Oxford as well - similar issue.IanB2 said:
Cambridge itself, with a very narrow river, solves the problem with “the bumps”, whereby all the competing boats start off in line, and you advance position by catching or bumping the boat in front.Malmesbury said:
On the boat race -IshmaelZ said:
They don't, there is nothing to stop any other two universities from challenging each other to an annual rowing match and I imagine the Thames would be made available for the appropriate fee.nichomar said:
Who said anything about slaves? Why should Oxbridge have these privileges over other universities?moonshine said:
Does the popularity of these events not “suggest” to you that there remains a place for them? What’s with people these days feeling it’s their right to “suggest” to other people how they should and shouldn’t spend their leisure time and money. It’s not like a rowing race or rugby match exploits slaves like at the colosseum. Get over yourself.nichomar said:
I didn’t demand just suggested that it should be, same with the farcity cricket at Lords and Rugby at Twickenham.moonshine said:
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?nichomar said:
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.Malmesbury said:
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
- due to the unique format of the race, taking place over a long, winding course on a tidal river, there is no interest from other universities for taking part. Modern rowing training (like all athletic training) is finely tuned. Everyone else in rowing is training for 2000m, over a straight course, in flat water.
- it would be quite hard to row with a half dozen competitors - despite the width of the Thames, the "good" line is quite narrow. Unlike other rowing, the idea is to get in front of your opponent and block the "good" line. With multiple competitors, collisions would be almost inevitable.
Extrapolating, a gaggle of other universities could be allowed to compete by starting off some yards back from Oxford and Cambridge, and if any of them manage to catch the boat in second place, they get to be one of the top two the year following?
Have you rowed on the tidal bit of the Thames? Doing bumps would be... interesting. In the cave-diving-for-lols category of fun....
No one else has shown interest in taking part, as far as I know.0 -
Anyway if your willing to live with quarantine on your return I suggest Benidorm as one of the safest places on the planet to go. There will be bugger all to do except lie on the beach, which is almost deserted but you’ll be safe apart from the travel.0
-
Sorry to hear that. Condolences to you and your friend.HYUFD said:Received some sad news tonight that a friend's brother has been killed in a climbing accident in Scotland, only met him once or twice but taken too soon and shows the natural world can be both beautiful and dangerous
And, a bit late in the day, congratulations to you on your engagement.2 -
No-one's concerns are meaningless to me. But this is limited to 10-20% of the population, at best, and opinion polling shows heavy majorities across all political opinions and races in favour of keeping it.Dura_Ace said:
Some of your fellow Britons think it does and find it offensive. Are their concerns meaningless to you?Casino_Royale said:
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.
Instead, I'd argue with them that their reasons for taking offence are baseless. If they still insisted on doing so then that'd be unfortunate but their decision.
You're on a hiding to nothing if you think the object of public policy should be to ensure everyone is unoffended.1 -
Superb.ydoethur said:
To cheer people up, here is a great piece of modern satire:Big_G_NorthWales said:
Ms Toynbee is always severely depressingOldKingCole said:Hello everyone; not going to suggest it's a good morning. Can't think of many, indeed if any reasons for saying so.
Ms Toynbee, in the Guardian is quite severely depressing, too.
Although on a personal level I'm alive and ready for the gym, which at 80+ is probably something about which to be happy!
https://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/Polly_Toynbee
0 -
Nah, Lewes is as good as ever and it's the thing I'll be most disappointed to miss the year (including an FA Cup Final!).Charles said:
Yes, although I think it’s right that it’s now “bonfire night” not “guy fawkes night”.tlg86 said:I'll tell you something else that's outdated: 5 November. But we still do it as it's good fun.
Also Lewes may have passed its sell by date
0 -
Are British dreams so hard to beat?IshmaelZ said:
I'm a great one for compromise, and I think we can resolve this to the satisfaction of everyone by tacitly dropping RB and introducing John Peel in its place.
A Union Jack on every street
Another flag in the neighbourhood
Wish it was mine, it looks so good
I wanna quit Europe, wanna quit it right
Get British kicks right through the night1 -
But, we still burn a "Guy".Charles said:
Yes, although I think it’s right that it’s now “bonfire night” not “guy fawkes night”.tlg86 said:I'll tell you something else that's outdated: 5 November. But we still do it as it's good fun.
Also Lewes may have passed its sell by date
Today we celebrate the thwarting of an effort to blow-up parliament (and our democratic traditions) rather than the lingering threat of papacy.0 -
My point was slightly tongue in cheek but also to show how it can be (and could be) a rallying cry for freedom too. Things can go out of fashion (this hasn't by the way) and can also come back into fashion.malcolmg said:
God help us , now we are going to sing Land of Hope and Glory to the Chinese as they buy up what will be left of the UK or generally tweak our noses and laugh at us. Great idea.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, slavery was awful - and that's why an abolitionist campaign developed in Britain in the late 18th Century (ironically, this song helped as the campaigners were able to point out the inconsistencies) - and then it was ceased, phased out and then stamped out.IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
The song is a celebration of independent Britishness and freedom that is still relevant today, and I can see it being even more so in future if China becomes ever more powerful in the geopolitical and economic space such that it starts to impinge on our freedoms rather than us supinely surrendering to it.
Flower of Scotland talks about sending King Edward's army home "tae think again" - do you think that should be stripped out?0 -
I had an interesting moment - trying to explain to my Catholic wife and her Polish friend (also Catholic) why it was a bit interesting celebrating Guy Fawkes night.Casino_Royale said:
But, we still burn a "Guy".Charles said:
Yes, although I think it’s right that it’s now “bonfire night” not “guy fawkes night”.tlg86 said:I'll tell you something else that's outdated: 5 November. But we still do it as it's good fun.
Also Lewes may have passed its sell by date
Today we celebrate the thwarting of an effort to blow-up parliament (and our democratic traditions) rather than the lingering threat of papacy.
I was told to stop spoiling the fun....0 -
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-quit-six-months-covid-utter-nonsense_uk_5f44c288c5b6c00d03b390cd
Doesn't sound totally implausible to me0 -
@HYUFD Please accept my condolences for your friend.0
-
Hasn't JP been cancelled for marrying a 14 year old or something of the sort?Dura_Ace said:
Are British dreams so hard to beat?IshmaelZ said:
I'm a great one for compromise, and I think we can resolve this to the satisfaction of everyone by tacitly dropping RB and introducing John Peel in its place.
A Union Jack on every street
Another flag in the neighbourhood
Wish it was mine, it looks so good
I wanna quit Europe, wanna quit it right
Get British kicks right through the night0 -
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us0 -
ESPNCRICINFO UPDATE
9.40am: Morning all. Unfortunately the weather has been as advertised in Southampton - the match officials were probably right not to bother with the 10.30am start option today - and the ground looks pretty waterlogged. That said, some of the forecasts for this afternoon are looking brighter, so there's every chance we'll get on at some stage.
You takes your choice draw 1.41
England 3.4
I think it should be 1.1 and 8 myself but maybe thats just me.2 -
Right, must do some work.
Play nicely everyone.0 -
Thanks CyclefreeCyclefree said:
Sorry to hear that. Condolences to you and your friend.HYUFD said:Received some sad news tonight that a friend's brother has been killed in a climbing accident in Scotland, only met him once or twice but taken too soon and shows the natural world can be both beautiful and dangerous
And, a bit late in the day, congratulations to you on your engagement.0 -
Forgetting the process is set by the UK government.CarlottaVance said:Something to look forward to, or not.
AgentP22/status/1298173616736088070?s=20
It could be produced by Martian statisticians for all it matters.0 -
Yes I did exactly the same thing and googled the actual lyrics which do not seem the slightest bit controversial.Charles said:
Also is there an objective standard?TOPPING said:
*DISCLAIMER FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING AN ARGUMENTATIVE SOD ON PB*IanB2 said:
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.Luckyguy1983 said:
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
Who is to say what is offensive?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Hope_and_Glory
Take Land of Hope and Glory. The actual *words* are inoffensive - the argument has to be on the implied sentiments, which seems challenging
Rule Britannia, meanwhile, I can just about see issues, albeit they are tenuous, but then for heaven's sake I hope no one actually takes the time to read the bible.1 -
You have become engaged?!HYUFD said:
Thanks CyclefreeCyclefree said:
Sorry to hear that. Condolences to you and your friend.HYUFD said:Received some sad news tonight that a friend's brother has been killed in a climbing accident in Scotland, only met him once or twice but taken too soon and shows the natural world can be both beautiful and dangerous
And, a bit late in the day, congratulations to you on your engagement.
Missed that apols - many congratulations.2 -
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us0 -
The clue was there when he continuously trumpeted Teenage Kicks as his favourite song. He was also very fond of Are You Experienced? which is another hymn to ephebophilia.Theuniondivvie said:
Hasn't JP been cancelled for marrying a 14 year old or something of the sort?Dura_Ace said:
Are British dreams so hard to beat?IshmaelZ said:
I'm a great one for compromise, and I think we can resolve this to the satisfaction of everyone by tacitly dropping RB and introducing John Peel in its place.
A Union Jack on every street
Another flag in the neighbourhood
Wish it was mine, it looks so good
I wanna quit Europe, wanna quit it right
Get British kicks right through the night0 -
Different JP, and mine did something *much* worse.Theuniondivvie said:
Hasn't JP been cancelled for marrying a 14 year old or something of the sort?Dura_Ace said:
Are British dreams so hard to beat?IshmaelZ said:
I'm a great one for compromise, and I think we can resolve this to the satisfaction of everyone by tacitly dropping RB and introducing John Peel in its place.
A Union Jack on every street
Another flag in the neighbourhood
Wish it was mine, it looks so good
I wanna quit Europe, wanna quit it right
Get British kicks right through the night0 -
Cunard suspends all sailings until Spring 2021 and scraps one ship's Far East/Australasia itineraries in favour of Southampton ones:
https://www.cunard.com/en-gb/contact-us/travel-health-advisories0 -
I think Keir's response is very sensible, centre-ground, moderate. I like it0
-
Is this a real argument? Some of my fellow Britons have all sorts of ridiculous opinions, like wanting a commie crank to be Prime Minister (spoiler: there's about a 99% overlap between them and those who wish to wokeify the Proms). Their 'concerns' should be treated with the loftiest of disdain.Dura_Ace said:
Some of your fellow Britons think it does and find it offensive. Are their concerns meaningless to you?Casino_Royale said:
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.1 -
They're Scottish government statistics, produced by Scottish government statisticians. Why are you "doing down" Scotland?Alistair said:
Forgetting the process is set by the UK government.CarlottaVance said:Something to look forward to, or not.
AgentP22/status/1298173616736088070?s=20
It could be produced by Martian statisticians for all it matters.
0 -
That's actually to the right of Number 10s response!CorrectHorseBattery said:1 -
To be fair it wasn’t the British saying that about themselves - it was the observations of a mermaid at the bottom of the deep blue sea.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.1 -
Indeed not, but I think you thought Corbyn could win in 2019...CorrectHorseBattery said:https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-quit-six-months-covid-utter-nonsense_uk_5f44c288c5b6c00d03b390cd
Doesn't sound totally implausible to me1 -
Typical crap from you prove that modernizing and bringing the proms into the 21c has anything to do with electing (not that there has been the option recently) a commie crank as PM, You treat any affront to your privileged position with disdain.BluestBlue said:
Is this a real argument? Some of my fellow Britons have all sorts of ridiculous opinions, like wanting a commie crank to be Prime Minister (spoiler: there's about a 99% overlap between them and those who wish to wokeify the Proms). Their 'concerns' should be treated with the loftiest of disdain.Dura_Ace said:
Some of your fellow Britons think it does and find it offensive. Are their concerns meaningless to you?Casino_Royale said:
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.1 -
-
More fudge than BakeOffCorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
I think the lads setting this bonfire still have a wee hard on for the threat of papacy.Casino_Royale said:
But, we still burn a "Guy".Charles said:
Yes, although I think it’s right that it’s now “bonfire night” not “guy fawkes night”.tlg86 said:I'll tell you something else that's outdated: 5 November. But we still do it as it's good fun.
Also Lewes may have passed its sell by date
Today we celebrate the thwarting of an effort to blow-up parliament (and our democratic traditions) rather than the lingering threat of papacy.
0 -
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes0 -
Charles said:
Yes, although I think it’s right that it’s now “bonfire night” not “guy fawkes night”.tlg86 said:I'll tell you something else that's outdated: 5 November. But we still do it as it's good fun.
Also Lewes may have passed its sell by date
Or to look at it from another perspective, why no outrage at still celebrating the crushing of an attempt to fight back against the denial of rights to and persecution of a religious minority in Britain, one which went on for the best part of three centuries.Casino_Royale said:
But, we still burn a "Guy".Charles said:
Yes, although I think it’s right that it’s now “bonfire night” not “guy fawkes night”.tlg86 said:I'll tell you something else that's outdated: 5 November. But we still do it as it's good fun.
Also Lewes may have passed its sell by date
Today we celebrate the thwarting of an effort to blow-up parliament (and our democratic traditions) rather than the lingering threat of papacy.
If some self-inquiry is needed into Britain’s attitudes to and treatment of black people, the same could be said of its attitudes to and treatment of Catholics and the Irish over the centuries.
Or we could simply accept that we have a history, good and bad, enjoy traditions and understand that watching fireworks or singing songs does not mean we're going to go out and beat up the next black/Catholic/Irish/fill in your minority of choice we see.1 -
Your overall position would be stronger if you admitted the existence of exceptions and edge cases. Consider, hypothetically, a patriotic German song written in the early 40s with a chorus which said that "True born Germans shall never ever ever be sent to death camps," and there's a valid historical claim that the song is really about, oooh, the fighting on the Russian front, not about Jews at all. Is that song OK? I know it's different, but what are the *relevant* differences?BluestBlue said:
Is this a real argument? Some of my fellow Britons have all sorts of ridiculous opinions, like wanting a commie crank to be Prime Minister (spoiler: there's about a 99% overlap between them and those who wish to wokeify the Proms). Their 'concerns' should be treated with the loftiest of disdain.Dura_Ace said:
Some of your fellow Britons think it does and find it offensive. Are their concerns meaningless to you?Casino_Royale said:
Rule Britannia does no such thing.Dura_Ace said:
You can't really do that while lustily belting out a song that celebrates Britishness as an exclusively white identity. (Rule Britannia).Casino_Royale said:
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.1 -
Thankyou ToppingTOPPING said:
You have become engaged?!HYUFD said:
Thanks CyclefreeCyclefree said:
Sorry to hear that. Condolences to you and your friend.HYUFD said:Received some sad news tonight that a friend's brother has been killed in a climbing accident in Scotland, only met him once or twice but taken too soon and shows the natural world can be both beautiful and dangerous
And, a bit late in the day, congratulations to you on your engagement.
Missed that apols - many congratulations.0 -
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes1 -
Biden has overnight ticked up to 51.4% in 538's rolling average of national polls for the presidential election. That's the highest he's been at any point to date. The net lead over Trump is back up to 9.2%.0
-
You can’t help but see the headlines on how well the government is doing...CarlottaVance said:3 -
Looking at the longer-term history of this it is in some ways more surprising that England has become so anti-gun (an opinion I share).kle4 said:
No matter the history of the nation and why they have the gun rules they have, I will never understand why so many americans love guns as much as they do, where it genuinely seems to be more important than any other issue and mean that they should be able to take and use their guns absolutlely everywhere. Even with a small number of people having a lot of guns and that skewing the average, the tolerance of the actions of those people just beggars belief.DavidL said:
Absolutely. The degree of tolerance given to these gun totting lunatics is just bizarre.rcs1000 said:
I wonder what would have happened if black men with guns had attempted to break into the state house.williamglenn said:The armed wing of the anti-maskers.
https://twitter.com/khennessey/status/1298039192820297729?s=21
There was a time that the gun on the wall was seen as an essential guarantor of English liberty. Tyrannical kings were the sort of people who limited who could possess weapons. When and how did that change?
It reminds me of some of the arguments over spelling, when someone's it turns out that the American form preserves an older British standard, that was later changed in Britain, rather than the other way round.0 -
It's a shame don't know isn't split out into don't know and don't care.nichomar said:
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes0 -
Probably.nichomar said:
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes
How deep is the shy trump iceberg here and in the states?
Nobody knows.
0 -
Although I can see that atheists might have grounds to complain about “God who make you mighty” while others might argue that “make you mightier yet” is a call for Empire 2.0.TOPPING said:
Yes I did exactly the same thing and googled the actual lyrics which do not seem the slightest bit controversial.Charles said:
Also is there an objective standard?TOPPING said:
*DISCLAIMER FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING AN ARGUMENTATIVE SOD ON PB*IanB2 said:
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.Luckyguy1983 said:
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
Who is to say what is offensive?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Hope_and_Glory
Take Land of Hope and Glory. The actual *words* are inoffensive - the argument has to be on the implied sentiments, which seems challenging
Rule Britannia, meanwhile, I can just about see issues, albeit they are tenuous, but then for heaven's sake I hope no one actually takes the time to read the bible.
Which it isn’t0 -
Not this one.nichomar said:
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes
I want him gone
He is unfit for the office1 -
The trouble is that being a Trump supporter has been made such an anathema by the media and twitter, they have no idea of the size of their opposition.tlg86 said:
It's a shame don't know isn't split out into don't know and don't care.nichomar said:
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes
Its just a guesstimate.1 -
Looks like parts of Spain are not expecting the return to school to go universally well and are formulating a Plan B
The Community of Madrid plans to install 6,100 cameras in classrooms to teach online classes to a large part of the students and will also buy 70,000 computers so that teachers and students can connect by videoconference during this school year. This has been indicated to Efe, sources of the regional government, who have advanced part of the plan for going back to school that will be presented at 1:00 p.m. by the president of the Community of Madrid, Isabel Díaz Ayuso, together with the Minister of Education, Enrique Ossorio, and that of Health, Enrique Ruiz Escudero0 -
Except Biden is no Obama....eristdoof said:
The Democrats won Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin in 2012. It#s not as if the party can't get their acts together in those states.IanB2 said:
Do they have an excellent ground game in the states (and counties within states) that actually matter, though? It's hardly as if activists can be sent from California or New York to go knocking up in Florida or wherever.eristdoof said:
The Dems had an excellent "ground game" in 2008. Hopefully in the last 3 years they have taken a hard look at how they lost it in 2016 (that means not just lazily blaming it on the candidate), and work out how to do better this time round.MrEd said:
The mood on here seems to be that, while best not to be complacent, the odds very much lie with Biden (@DavidL, that is not aimed at you BTW). I wouldn't be too confident in that. The Republicans are pretty good on their ground game and, if it was the pattern that some were outlining on here of consistent Biden leads that are unlikely to be pulled back by Trump, you would expect to see more panic in the GOP's action. There isn't. They seem quite comfortable with where they are and reasonably confident, especially given the macro situation.DavidL said:
I think that this is the key difference. Biden doesn't have many more positives than Clinton but he has a hell of a lot fewer negatives.rcs1000 said:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/rcs1000 said:
72 days.MrEd said:As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
That's how long is left.
And Biden continues to average over 50% in the polls. Which Clinton never did.
Now. It's entirely possible the polls are wrong. And it's possible that this issue of law and order will completely dominate the election. And I totally buy that Trump voters are more enthused.
The problem is that Trump should be closing the gap. He's not. Indeed, the polls seem to be worsening for him. And the economic news is not good. New unemployment claims were back at almost a million last week, that's a sharp reversal of previous progress.
Can I see Trump winning? Of course I can.
But while I thought he was value at 30% a month ago, he's now above 40%, when his polling position has worsened.
Law and order may be his way back. But it's a stretch. It's a lot easier to run on a "all is anarchy, you need me to get order" when you're the challenger than when you're the incumbent.
Biden is averaging 51.4% in the 538 national poll. The highest that Ms Clinton ever reached (her absolute high watermark in the poll of polls) was 46%.
Now, I am sure some will put that down to the industrial-style cheating the GOP is planning for November, including decapitating the USPS etc etc but it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.0 -
An excellent response from Starmer. Refuses to be drawn into a contrived debate set as a trap by his political opponents, while using the issue to simultaneously emphasise once again his patriotic credentials while emphathising with the need to reexamine our past.CorrectHorseBattery said:2 -
That's not true at all. Trump got fewer votes than Romney in key swing states. Johnson got more votes than anyone has received in decades, millions more than Cameron ever achieved.Stuartinromford said:
Another way that Trump and Johnson rhyme.Alistair said:A dialog
"you are all too stupid and enmeshed in your liberal elite views to understamnd why Trump is so phenomenally popular which is why he won the election over the hugely unpopular Hilary Clinton"
"Trump got 3 million less votes than Clinton"
"Ah, I'm talking about his appeal to the White Working Classes which you would never understand with your Liberal elite views. His huge popularity with the WWC is why he won rust belt states like Wisconsin the like of which Romney could never reach"
"Trump got less votes than Romney in Wisconsin"
"You'll never understand Trump"
Both their election wins were substantially down to the failings of their opponents, but they took their wins as signs of their brilliance and a mandate to do whatever the hell they liked.
Dismiss Johnson's own popularity at your own peril.1 -
Yeah those illegal wars and the sexual exploitation of impressionable followers whilst in office!!Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not this one.nichomar said:
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes
I want him gone
He is unfit for the office
Oh wait....0 -
Agreed. He's even more xenophobic and unacceptable than Theresa May. He needs to go.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not this one.nichomar said:
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes
I want him gone
He is unfit for the office0 -
But you wouldn’t have answered don’t know, the proportion of DKs is largest amongst Tory supporters.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not this one.nichomar said:
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes
I want him gone
He is unfit for the office0 -
Speaking as an atheist if we objected to every old song like that that refers to God there wouldn't be many old songs left. I don't object to it.Charles said:
Although I can see that atheists might have grounds to complain about “God who make you mighty” while others might argue that “make you mightier yet” is a call for Empire 2.0.TOPPING said:
Yes I did exactly the same thing and googled the actual lyrics which do not seem the slightest bit controversial.Charles said:
Also is there an objective standard?TOPPING said:
*DISCLAIMER FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING AN ARGUMENTATIVE SOD ON PB*IanB2 said:
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.Luckyguy1983 said:
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
Who is to say what is offensive?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Hope_and_Glory
Take Land of Hope and Glory. The actual *words* are inoffensive - the argument has to be on the implied sentiments, which seems challenging
Rule Britannia, meanwhile, I can just about see issues, albeit they are tenuous, but then for heaven's sake I hope no one actually takes the time to read the bible.
Which it isn’t1 -
On topic, there's all kinds of uncertainty and weirdness and the chance of Trump somehow turning it around isn't trivial, but it's also not 42%.
The voters are very clear that they don't want him. The polling is totally consistent. And to date, the GOP haven't been able to come up with anything against Biden that shows any sign of sticking, unlike with Hillary where at this point in the cycle they had multiple lines of attack that she was weak at defending.
Maybe 20%?1 -
If the 2018 mid terms were anything to go by, not that deep. Maybe all these shy guys were saving themselves for the big one?contrarian said:
Probably.nichomar said:
A lot of shy trump supporters hidden in the Tory don’t knows I betHYUFD said:
Maybe but if Obama's VP becomes President we would, in the words of Obama himself go to 'the back of the queue' for any US trade deal.glw said:
Trump is focused on "Trump First". He's not fit to hold any office. He's literally one of the most dishonest people in history, as well as a racist, sexist, moron. Any Tory who supports Trump is a chump.HYUFD said:
Interesting, particularly when pre 2000 Hague went to the US for a meeting with George W Bush who he strongly supported, though Hague was a Remainer in 2016 and any support Trump does have in the UK tends to come very much from the most hardcore of the Leave side.CarlottaVance said:
I think a Biden administration would prioritise the EU for a US trade deal first over the UK though unlike Trump, though of course Trump is very much focused on 'America First' rather than giving any other nations favours, including us
Tory voters overall narrowly prefer Biden, 36% of Tories would vote for Biden, 26% of Tories would vote for Trump so Hague is close to his party's mainstream on this.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1283804957897109504?s=20
I suspect only Brexit Party and UKIP supporters would give Trump the majority of their votes
How deep is the shy trump iceberg here and in the states?
Nobody knows.1 -
In the modern climate I should report a 'hate' crime - Scottish nurse belting out flower of Scotland into my face in New Zealand bar (1998, Eng had just lost 40-15 against the All Blacks). I let her off as she was cute (and drunk).Casino_Royale said:
My point was slightly tongue in cheek but also to show how it can be (and could be) a rallying cry for freedom too. Things can go out of fashion (this hasn't by the way) and can also come back into fashion.malcolmg said:
God help us , now we are going to sing Land of Hope and Glory to the Chinese as they buy up what will be left of the UK or generally tweak our noses and laugh at us. Great idea.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, slavery was awful - and that's why an abolitionist campaign developed in Britain in the late 18th Century (ironically, this song helped as the campaigners were able to point out the inconsistencies) - and then it was ceased, phased out and then stamped out.IshmaelZ said:
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.kle4 said:
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.nichomar said:
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.tlg86 said:
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...nichomar said:
According to the newspapers there was.tlg86 said:
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.nichomar said:
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.moonshine said:On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
The song is a celebration of independent Britishness and freedom that is still relevant today, and I can see it being even more so in future if China becomes ever more powerful in the geopolitical and economic space such that it starts to impinge on our freedoms rather than us supinely surrendering to it.
Flower of Scotland talks about sending King Edward's army home "tae think again" - do you think that should be stripped out?
As always, good intentions lead to stupidity in the long run...0 -
Sure, but he's got the Obama team, and to date they've been extremely sure-footed.MarqueeMark said:
Except Biden is no Obama....eristdoof said:
The Democrats won Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin in 2012. It#s not as if the party can't get their acts together in those states.0 -
What does it even mean?Charles said:
You can’t help but see the headlines on how well the government is doing...CarlottaVance said:
UK 22 what?0
