Tobias Schneider @tobiaschneider I'm trying not to lap up every rumor circulating around Telegram, but the main challenge in establishing a clear picture of the situation in Kharkiv appears to be that Russian lines are collapsing faster than Ukraine can even advance and clear liberated areas. Astonishing.
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
FFS I thought you were a patriot?
“Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in.”
What ARE you talking about? The UK is a phenomenally effective soft power, and a pretty consequential hard power - with the 6th largest economy in the world
But it’s our soft power which truly impresses, from some of the world’s best universities to the world’s most popular sports league to the home of the world’s most spoken language (which much that comes from this) to a mighty tradition in all the arts, pop music to theatre, Harry Potter to Harry Styles
You need to get out more. Only then do you realise the powerful puissant sway of that small, rainy archipelago off northwest Europe
6th largest economy is not first though is it. Even Oxford and Cambridge are behind Stanford and MIT or Harvard in most global university league tables. More speak Mandarin than English. We have not won the World Cup since 1966 and most players in the Premier league are foreign, we just host it.
The arts centre is still Hollywood and increasingly China even if we have some good theatres and actors
No, we no longer rule 1/3 of the world. But nor does anyone else. Moreover, we had THE BIGGEST EMPIRE THERE HAS EVER BEEN OR EVER WILL BE. They can’t take that way from us, and no one will ever match it now. YAY Britain and GO England
Given the tiny size of the UK geographically and demographically, it is outstandingly consequential in world affairs
The only nation that matches us per capita or per sq km is Israel
Indeed I would say they are the two most influential races in world affairs and human history. The Jews and the English. Discuss
Next the Italians
*ducks*
I don't deny we still punch well above our size internationally.
Yet we are no longer a superpower or number 1 in almost anything apart from our royal family
Premier league Football receipts FX trading Virus gene sequencing Olympic cycling Print media Wildlife documentaries Offshore wind power International art market Numerical weather prediction (before ECMWF left Reading)
The US still leads on FX trading, wildlife docs are reliant on Attenborough who is as old as the Queen was, much of our print media is foreign owned as is the Premier league
London is the centre of the global Forex market. (Albeit NY isn't far behind these days.)
London maybe, the US overall however is still ahead of the UK once you add Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco etc to New York city
Do you really want me to fire up Bloomberg and to dig into the exact numbers?
I can do that if you like, but I'd be staggered if the UK wasn't ahead of the US ion Forex trading when all is counted.
Yup. From memory we are about 40% and the US 20%. Various factors not least time zone.
It does depend slightly on how you count it, such as whether you include in-country transactions or not, but irrespective of how exactly you count it, the UK is number one for Forex.
I always used to love how London was number one, even for the oddest pairs: Yen-to-Philippine Peso? It'll be London first, followed by Tokyo second and Manila third.
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
FFS I thought you were a patriot?
“Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in.”
What ARE you talking about? The UK is a phenomenally effective soft power, and a pretty consequential hard power - with the 6th largest economy in the world
But it’s our soft power which truly impresses, from some of the world’s best universities to the world’s most popular sports league to the home of the world’s most spoken language (which much that comes from this) to a mighty tradition in all the arts, pop music to theatre, Harry Potter to Harry Styles
You need to get out more. Only then do you realise the powerful puissant sway of that small, rainy archipelago off northwest Europe
6th largest economy is not first though is it. Even Oxford and Cambridge are behind Stanford and MIT or Harvard in most global university league tables. More speak Mandarin than English. We have not won the World Cup since 1966 and most players in the Premier league are foreign, we just host it.
The arts centre is still Hollywood and increasingly China even if we have some good theatres and actors and musicians most Oscar and Grammy winners are still American. So yes, my point stands, we do well I many things relative to our size as you say. Yet the only thing we are still global no 1 on is the best known and recognised Royal family, as the global coverage of the last few days confirms
English is a lingua franca, unlike Mandarin. English literature is pretty well dominant, across the world.
Let’s be honest though, American is the lingua franca.
But that’s actually not true. It’s glib
American English and British English duke it out worldwide, I am not at all sure American English prevails indeed I’d say British English maintains a healthy advantage
See the new Game of Thrones and LOTR, the biggest new TV drama series on the planet. British accents, British themes, British stories, British actors, British English
American money, but no one cares about that. The premium version of the language is British
Or, by way of synthesis, America is the reason English is the lingua franca. British English is the super-premium label. Rather like Prosecco is behind the surge in sparkling wind consumption…
The most interesting political event in the next few days is the Swedish general election on Sunday. Looks like it could be a real nailbiter. Both main blocs are on about 49% in the polls.
And Brazil coming up. Will Bolsonaro cede power if he loses? I doubt it. It's not the right wing populist way.
Will be interesting (among plenty of other & more important things) to find out the future of the relatively-recent, double-barreled surname "Mountbatten-Windsor".
My guess is that KCIII keeps it. But maybe not?
Charles is a Wittelsbach, and his mum was a Wettin. Victoria was a Welf.
Think you've just given Meaghan (and others) some great ideas for baby names!
AND why leave out Saxe, Coburg, Gotha, Tudor, Stuart, Hanover, Sonderburg, Glücksburg, etc., etc.
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
FFS I thought you were a patriot?
“Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in.”
What ARE you talking about? The UK is a phenomenally effective soft power, and a pretty consequential hard power - with the 6th largest economy in the world
But it’s our soft power which truly impresses, from some of the world’s best universities to the world’s most popular sports league to the home of the world’s most spoken language (which much that comes from this) to a mighty tradition in all the arts, pop music to theatre, Harry Potter to Harry Styles
You need to get out more. Only then do you realise the powerful puissant sway of that small, rainy archipelago off northwest Europe
6th largest economy is not first though is it. Even Oxford and Cambridge are behind Stanford and MIT or Harvard in most global university league tables. More speak Mandarin than English. We have not won the World Cup since 1966 and most players in the Premier league are foreign, we just host it.
The arts centre is still Hollywood and increasingly China even if we have some good theatres and actors and musicians most Oscar and Grammy winners are still American. So yes, my point stands, we do well I many things relative to our size as you say. Yet the only thing we are still global no 1 on is the best known and recognised Royal family, as the global coverage of the last few days confirms
English is a lingua franca, unlike Mandarin. English literature is pretty well dominant, across the world.
Let’s be honest though, American is the lingua franca.
But that’s actually not true. It’s glib
American English and British English duke it out worldwide, I am not at all sure American English prevails indeed I’d say British English maintains a healthy advantage
See the new Game of Thrones and LOTR, the biggest new TV drama series on the planet. British accents, British themes, British stories, British actors, British English
American money, but no one cares about that. The premium version of the language is British
Or, by way of synthesis, America is the reason English is the lingua franca. British English is the super-premium label. Rather like Prosecco is behind the surge in sparkling wind consumption but Champagne (and ESW, and Franciacorta) remains the premium brand.
Best value drink on the planet is Spanish cava. If you regularly drink run of the mill champagne, switch to cava, with dom perignon every 4th bottle. Same cost.
You have clearly never drank meths.
Old-school after-shave is also a great budget option. Just make sure to avoid any open flame.
Tobias Schneider @tobiaschneider I'm trying not to lap up every rumor circulating around Telegram, but the main challenge in establishing a clear picture of the situation in Kharkiv appears to be that Russian lines are collapsing faster than Ukraine can even advance and clear liberated areas. Astonishing.
It will be interesting to see how far the collapse continues.
There was some stuff I saw earlier about the Ukrainians capturing some seriously obsolete (1950s) artillery. This was beyond rolling out the old 122mm stuff.
We dodged Mordaunt, who I really liked, but who we now know would have had a very difficult time for reasons that are not her fault. We dodged Sunak, who whilst he had many personal qualities, would have taken a 'take your medicine' approach to recession and economic contraction, and been even worse. We mocked Truss (I did anyway), but actually we've ended up with someone who is passionate about our country prospering, and is prepared to have a scrap if necessary. It shows fate knows a lot better than we do at times.
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
FFS I thought you were a patriot?
“Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in.”
What ARE you talking about? The UK is a phenomenally effective soft power, and a pretty consequential hard power - with the 6th largest economy in the world
But it’s our soft power which truly impresses, from some of the world’s best universities to the world’s most popular sports league to the home of the world’s most spoken language (which much that comes from this) to a mighty tradition in all the arts, pop music to theatre, Harry Potter to Harry Styles
You need to get out more. Only then do you realise the powerful puissant sway of that small, rainy archipelago off northwest Europe
6th largest economy is not first though is it. Even Oxford and Cambridge are behind Stanford and MIT or Harvard in most global university league tables. More speak Mandarin than English. We have not won the World Cup since 1966 and most players in the Premier league are foreign, we just host it.
The arts centre is still Hollywood and increasingly China even if we have some good theatres and actors and musicians most Oscar and Grammy winners are still American. So yes, my point stands, we do well I many things relative to our size as you say. Yet the only thing we are still global no 1 on is the best known and recognised Royal family, as the global coverage of the last few days confirms
English is a lingua franca, unlike Mandarin. English literature is pretty well dominant, across the world.
Let’s be honest though, American is the lingua franca.
But that’s actually not true. It’s glib
American English and British English duke it out worldwide, I am not at all sure American English prevails indeed I’d say British English maintains a healthy advantage
See the new Game of Thrones and LOTR, the biggest new TV drama series on the planet. British accents, British themes, British stories, British actors, British English
American money, but no one cares about that. The premium version of the language is British
The accents is just because it seems 'proper' for historical esque things to not sound like they are from Brooklyn or wherever.
"The threats picked up after misinformation spread online that suggested the hospital performed gender-affirming genital surgeries on young children.
Boston Children’s says it provides overall care to children who identify as transgender or nonbinary, but surgeries are performed only on consenting adults.
“Age 18 is used to reflect the standard age of majority for medical decision-making. Boston Children’s does not perform genital surgeries as part of gender-affirming care on a patient under the age of 18,” the statement says. "
We dodged Mordaunt, who I really liked, but who we now know would have had a very difficult time for reasons that are not her fault. We dodged Sunak, who whilst he had many personal qualities, would have taken a 'take your medicine' approach to recession and economic contraction, and been even worse. We mocked Truss (I did anyway), but actually we've ended up with someone who is passionate about our country prospering, and is prepared to have a scrap if necessary. It shows fate knows a lot better than we do at times.
If I was a Labour strategist, I’d be nervous
Not half as much as they would be.
Superb speech by Starmer today. He is growing into the role of PM in waiting imho.
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
Before you reached for and flung adjectives such as "ludicrous" and "absurd", you should have checked what I actually wrote. I posted a YouGov poll from 2021 which referenced similar polls in 2020 and 2019 and I said let's have another poll now. I drew particular attention to the large reported swing to republicanism in the 18-24 age group. Why you thought I meant a referendum I have no idea.
The media are screaming practically wall to wall that the monarchy represents the whole country and that an elderly woman with a palace and a couple of castles had a place in almost everyone's heart. Well how about a media organisation commissions a poll to find out whether that's true or not and publishes the results. Retain the monarchy or abolish it - see how the population feel about that question when a pollster rings them up and asks them. ASKS them. Not TELLS them what they think, which is what politicians of all parties and the entire media are doing right now. No cueing. No pictures of an elderly woman, or guys wearing medals, or good-looking young women either. No Range Rovers. No glamour. Just ask them and find out. What's the problem with that?
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
FFS I thought you were a patriot?
“Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in.”
What ARE you talking about? The UK is a phenomenally effective soft power, and a pretty consequential hard power - with the 6th largest economy in the world
But it’s our soft power which truly impresses, from some of the world’s best universities to the world’s most popular sports league to the home of the world’s most spoken language (which much that comes from this) to a mighty tradition in all the arts, pop music to theatre, Harry Potter to Harry Styles
You need to get out more. Only then do you realise the powerful puissant sway of that small, rainy archipelago off northwest Europe
6th largest economy is not first though is it. Even Oxford and Cambridge are behind Stanford and MIT or Harvard in most global university league tables. More speak Mandarin than English. We have not won the World Cup since 1966 and most players in the Premier league are foreign, we just host it.
The arts centre is still Hollywood and increasingly China even if we have some good theatres and actors
No, we no longer rule 1/3 of the world. But nor does anyone else. Moreover, we had THE BIGGEST EMPIRE THERE HAS EVER BEEN OR EVER WILL BE. They can’t take that way from us, and no one will ever match it now. YAY Britain and GO England
Given the tiny size of the UK geographically and demographically, it is outstandingly consequential in world affairs
The only nation that matches us per capita or per sq km is Israel
Indeed I would say they are the two most influential races in world affairs and human history. The Jews and the English. Discuss
Next the Italians
*ducks*
I don't deny we still punch well above our size internationally.
Yet we are no longer a superpower or number 1 in almost anything apart from our royal family
Premier league Football receipts FX trading Virus gene sequencing Olympic cycling Print media Wildlife documentaries Offshore wind power International art market Numerical weather prediction (before ECMWF left Reading)
Greatest cricket ground in the world Formula One engineering
New books published per capita. (Although third in absolute numbers behind the US and China)
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
Before you reached for and flung adjectives such as "ludicrous" and "absurd", you should have checked what I actually wrote. I posted a YouGov poll from 2021 which referenced similar polls in 2020 and 2019 and I said let's have another poll now. I drew particular attention to the large reported swing to republicanism in the 18-24 age group. Why you thought I meant a referendum I have no idea.
The media are screaming practically wall to wall that the monarchy represents the whole country and that an elderly woman with a palace and a couple of castles had a place in almost everyone's heart. Well how about a media organisation commissions a poll to find out whether that's true or not and publishes the results. Retain the monarchy or abolish it - see how the population feel about that question when a pollster rings them up and asks them. ASKS them. Not TELLS them what they think, which is what politicians of all parties and the entire media are doing right now. No cueing. No pictures of an elderly woman, or guys wearing medals, or good-looking young women either. No Range Rovers. No glamour. Just ask them and find out. What's the problem with that?
Tobias Schneider @tobiaschneider I'm trying not to lap up every rumor circulating around Telegram, but the main challenge in establishing a clear picture of the situation in Kharkiv appears to be that Russian lines are collapsing faster than Ukraine can even advance and clear liberated areas. Astonishing.
NYT Sept 9 - Ukraine’s military made significant advances in recent days near the northeastern city of Izium, a key Russian stronghold, according to military analysts and geolocated photos and videos. The breakthrough — possibly some 50 kilometers in just a few days — threatened to encircle Russian forces, which appeared to be caught by surprise.
The progress of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in the east, paired with slower, more limited gains in the south, represents some of the most significant changes to the frontlines of the war in months.
The exact positions of Ukrainian forces around Izium could not be independently confirmed. The Russian military released a video with what it said were reinforcements headed to the Kharkiv area, but it has not made detailed statements about the status of the fighting.
But military analysts, satellite detections and photos and videos of Ukrainian forces indicate that they moved rapidly east toward Kupiansk in recent days, possibly getting close to the outskirts of the city. Capturing Kupiansk could threaten Russian supply lines to Izium. And the Ukrainian military claimed to capture the city of Balakliya, prompting Russian military bloggers to complain that Russia was poorly prepared.
The situation is fluid, and further Ukrainian gains may be more heavily contested as Russia stabilizes its response.
Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the east came in parallel to a push in the south that it had prepared for months, around the regional capital, Kherson. Russia was forced to redeploy troops to shore up its defenses in this area, which may have left its remaining forces in the east more thinly spread.
Ukrainian advances in the south have been slower. Ukrainian troops are fighting to push Russian troops back from the western side of the Dnipro river, which Russia has controlled since the first week of the invasion. After 12 days of intense fighting and shelling, Ukrainian forces have reclaimed a number of small settlements along the frontline.
Despite the successes, Ukrainian officials have warned that it will be a slow grind to reclaim more territory. Russian forces have shifted to defensive positions and have heavily mined the surrounding area.
The advances follow weeks of Ukrainian strikes on Russian equipment behind the frontlines, including ammunition depots and command posts.
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
FFS I thought you were a patriot?
“Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in.”
What ARE you talking about? The UK is a phenomenally effective soft power, and a pretty consequential hard power - with the 6th largest economy in the world
But it’s our soft power which truly impresses, from some of the world’s best universities to the world’s most popular sports league to the home of the world’s most spoken language (which much that comes from this) to a mighty tradition in all the arts, pop music to theatre, Harry Potter to Harry Styles
You need to get out more. Only then do you realise the powerful puissant sway of that small, rainy archipelago off northwest Europe
6th largest economy is not first though is it. Even Oxford and Cambridge are behind Stanford and MIT or Harvard in most global university league tables. More speak Mandarin than English. We have not won the World Cup since 1966 and most players in the Premier league are foreign, we just host it.
The arts centre is still Hollywood and increasingly China even if we have some good theatres and actors
No, we no longer rule 1/3 of the world. But nor does anyone else. Moreover, we had THE BIGGEST EMPIRE THERE HAS EVER BEEN OR EVER WILL BE. They can’t take that way from us, and no one will ever match it now. YAY Britain and GO England
Given the tiny size of the UK geographically and demographically, it is outstandingly consequential in world affairs
The only nation that matches us per capita or per sq km is Israel
Indeed I would say they are the two most influential races in world affairs and human history. The Jews and the English. Discuss
Next the Italians
*ducks*
I don't deny we still punch well above our size internationally.
Yet we are no longer a superpower or number 1 in almost anything apart from our royal family
Ambition is a good thing but you might want to see you sights a little lower. Punching above weight is a good result.
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
Before you reached for and flung adjectives such as "ludicrous" and "absurd", you should have checked what I actually wrote. I posted a YouGov poll from 2021 which referenced similar polls in 2020 and 2019 and I said let's have another poll now. I drew particular attention to the large reported swing to republicanism in the 18-24 age group. Why you thought I meant a referendum I have no idea.
The media are screaming practically wall to wall that the monarchy represents the whole country and that an elderly woman with a palace and a couple of castles had a place in almost everyone's heart. Well how about a media organisation commissions a poll to find out whether that's true or not and publishes the results. Retain the monarchy or abolish it - see how the population feel about that question when a pollster rings them up and asks them. ASKS them. Not TELLS them what they think, which is what politicians of all parties and the entire media are doing right now. No cueing. No pictures of an elderly woman, or guys wearing medals, or good-looking young women either. No Range Rovers. No glamour. Just ask them and find out. What's the problem with that?
Are you OK, hun?
The military reverses are clearly starting to get to him.
Tobias Schneider @tobiaschneider I'm trying not to lap up every rumor circulating around Telegram, but the main challenge in establishing a clear picture of the situation in Kharkiv appears to be that Russian lines are collapsing faster than Ukraine can even advance and clear liberated areas. Astonishing.
NYT Sept 9 - Ukraine’s military made significant advances in recent days near the northeastern city of Izium, a key Russian stronghold, according to military analysts and geolocated photos and videos. The breakthrough — possibly some 50 kilometers in just a few days — threatened to encircle Russian forces, which appeared to be caught by surprise.
The progress of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in the east, paired with slower, more limited gains in the south, represents some of the most significant changes to the frontlines of the war in months.
The exact positions of Ukrainian forces around Izium could not be independently confirmed. The Russian military released a video with what it said were reinforcements headed to the Kharkiv area, but it has not made detailed statements about the status of the fighting.
But military analysts, satellite detections and photos and videos of Ukrainian forces indicate that they moved rapidly east toward Kupiansk in recent days, possibly getting close to the outskirts of the city. Capturing Kupiansk could threaten Russian supply lines to Izium. And the Ukrainian military claimed to capture the city of Balakliya, prompting Russian military bloggers to complain that Russia was poorly prepared.
The situation is fluid, and further Ukrainian gains may be more heavily contested as Russia stabilizes its response.
Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the east came in parallel to a push in the south that it had prepared for months, around the regional capital, Kherson. Russia was forced to redeploy troops to shore up its defenses in this area, which may have left its remaining forces in the east more thinly spread.
Ukrainian advances in the south have been slower. Ukrainian troops are fighting to push Russian troops back from the western side of the Dnipro river, which Russia has controlled since the first week of the invasion. After 12 days of intense fighting and shelling, Ukrainian forces have reclaimed a number of small settlements along the frontline.
Despite the successes, Ukrainian officials have warned that it will be a slow grind to reclaim more territory. Russian forces have shifted to defensive positions and have heavily mined the surrounding area.
The advances follow weeks of Ukrainian strikes on Russian equipment behind the frontlines, including ammunition depots and command posts.
Feels like a very important moment. Even if things return to a slow grind it shows the world what the Ukrainians can achieve, it helps stave off public apathy at a barely changing line. Which makes it easier for leaders to keep pushing for more support.
rcs1000 said: "While I hate to argue with you, in the US all the book banning has been in the other direction."
I wouldn't say "all". Amazon, for example, recently banned "When Harry Becomes Sally". I immediately bought a copy from Barnes and Noble, and have mostly stopped buying books from Amazon. (Oddly, Amazon has not, yet anyway, banned Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage".)
I wouldn't walk around on most campuses with a copy of Nicholas Wade's "A Troublesome Ineritance", without disguising it, somehow.
And for decades, leftists have had trouble with "Huckleberry Finn." (I think "All the KIng's Men" would be problematic in many places, too.)
“At the council, which starts at 10:00 BST, the King will make a personal declaration about the death of the Queen and make an oath to preserve the Church of Scotland - because in Scotland there is a division of powers between church and state.”
rcs1000 said: "While I hate to argue with you, in the US all the book banning has been in the other direction."
I wouldn't say "all". Amazon, for example, recently banned "When Harry Becomes Sally". I immediately bought a copy from Barnes and Noble, and have mostly stopped buying books from Amazon. (Oddly, Amazon has not, yet anyway, banned Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage".)
I wouldn't walk around on most campuses with a copy of Nicholas Wade's "A Troublesome Ineritance", without disguising it, somehow.
And for decades, leftists have had trouble with "Huckleberry Finn." (I think "All the KIng's Men" would be problematic in many places, too.)
Ridiculous that people have to hide books when walking around campuses.
rcs1000 said: "While I hate to argue with you, in the US all the book banning has been in the other direction."
I wouldn't say "all". Amazon, for example, recently banned "When Harry Becomes Sally". I immediately bought a copy from Barnes and Noble, and have mostly stopped buying books from Amazon. (Oddly, Amazon has not, yet anyway, banned Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage".)
I wouldn't walk around on most campuses with a copy of Nicholas Wade's "A Troublesome Ineritance", without disguising it, somehow.
And for decades, leftists have had trouble with "Huckleberry Finn." (I think "All the KIng's Men" would be problematic in many places, too.)
You being embarrassed about carrying a certain book in public is not the same as attempting to ban it.
rcs1000 said: "While I hate to argue with you, in the US all the book banning has been in the other direction."
I wouldn't say "all". Amazon, for example, recently banned "When Harry Becomes Sally". I immediately bought a copy from Barnes and Noble, and have mostly stopped buying books from Amazon. (Oddly, Amazon has not, yet anyway, banned Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage".)
I wouldn't walk around on most campuses with a copy of Nicholas Wade's "A Troublesome Ineritance", without disguising it, somehow.
And for decades, leftists have had trouble with "Huckleberry Finn." (I think "All the KIng's Men" would be problematic in many places, too.)
Ridiculous that people have to hide books when walking around campuses.
rcs1000 said: "While I hate to argue with you, in the US all the book banning has been in the other direction."
I wouldn't say "all". Amazon, for example, recently banned "When Harry Becomes Sally". I immediately bought a copy from Barnes and Noble, and have mostly stopped buying books from Amazon. (Oddly, Amazon has not, yet anyway, banned Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage".)
I wouldn't walk around on most campuses with a copy of Nicholas Wade's "A Troublesome Ineritance", without disguising it, somehow.
And for decades, leftists have had trouble with "Huckleberry Finn." (I think "All the KIng's Men" would be problematic in many places, too.)
Ridiculous that people have to hide books when walking around campuses.
Technically I used to hide all of mine. But that’s because, like most people, I carried them in my rucksack rather than in my arms like a character in an American high school movie. Also I needed to keep the beer off them at lunch.
rcs1000 said: "You being embarrassed about carrying a certain book in public is not the same as attempting to ban it."
Well, on some campuses, being seen carrying that book could endanger one's career. Seriously.
You may or may not consider that a "ban", just as I might not consider a school choosing the stories and books to put in -- and not to put in -- its curriculum and library, a ban. I suppose there are a few schools around the world that do not make such choices, but I don't know of any government-supported grade scholols that don't make such decisions.
For example, do grade schools in Britain include pornography in their libraries? If they don't, is that a "ban"?
Here's an example from my childhood: Back in the 1950's, I saw a middle grade reader that included a story about a Soviet kid, during World War II. And then a year or two later, that story had been replaced by a story about a Yugoslav kid. Was that a ban?
(For the record: In the US, actual government "bans" of books mostly went out with court decisions years ago. But, since you were using "ban" more loosely, as often happens now, I did, too.)
In case you didn't know (but most of you do) the Accession Council will begin - and be televised for first time ever - at 10.00am UK time at St James Palace, for purpose of formally proclaiming King Charles III.
Regarding any use of Tactic Nukes, Russia has to be told that if they are used, NATO will intervene directly in Ukraine (but not in Russia) to stop the war. This will involve immediate punitive cruise missile (non-nuke) strike against Sevastopol and then demand that every Russian soldier in Ukraine lays down weapons or face direct NATO attack within 24 hrs. Then start withdrawing (without their artillery, tanks, missiles etc) back to Russia (not just Ukraine). One day of A10 attacks in Kherson should focus their minds.
Could I point out something to the ludicrous Dynamo on the last thread who wanted a referendum on the monarchy on the basis of one poll with a landslide 61% still in favour of the monarchy.
Having the best known Royal family in the world is about the only thing left we as the United Kingdom still lead the world in. It would be absurd to give it up
Before you reached for and flung adjectives such as "ludicrous" and "absurd", you should have checked what I actually wrote. I posted a YouGov poll from 2021 which referenced similar polls in 2020 and 2019 and I said let's have another poll now. I drew particular attention to the large reported swing to republicanism in the 18-24 age group. Why you thought I meant a referendum I have no idea.
The media are screaming practically wall to wall that the monarchy represents the whole country and that an elderly woman with a palace and a couple of castles had a place in almost everyone's heart. Well how about a media organisation commissions a poll to find out whether that's true or not and publishes the results. Retain the monarchy or abolish it - see how the population feel about that question when a pollster rings them up and asks them. ASKS them. Not TELLS them what they think, which is what politicians of all parties and the entire media are doing right now. No cueing. No pictures of an elderly woman, or guys wearing medals, or good-looking young women either. No Range Rovers. No glamour. Just ask them and find out. What's the problem with that?
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
"I’m beginning to think that party members made a huge mistake going with Truss rather than Sunak who had by some margin the best numbers from Tory MPs."
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Ukraine reports a very high Russian casualty rate these days. 650 KIA a day has not been uncommon, typically you’d assume double that wounded, meaning around 2,000 daily casualties for Russia. Usually comes out about 8am BST.
It doesn’t say where these occurring. It’s plausible that most of them are still being taken in Kherson, where Russia concentrated its forces and where the military process for Ukraine is one of careful but grinding attrition of the enemy, with territorial gains there eventually taking care of themselves. While the Kharkiv offensive is all about a lightning advance into largely abandoned defensive positions.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
Nope.
Not interested in the monarchy. Not interested in Charles.
And your hyperbolic nonsense only makes me more certain that I, along with millions of others, am right not to bother.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
I agree Nick. No one I know is paying it a great deal of attention.
She lived a full life. She served this country for a very long time and I think many people have a lot of respect for what she did.
But putting their lives on hold? Staying glued to the television? No.
As for Charles, ambivalence at best. Everyone I know thinks it's time they came up to date, which would mean stripping away lots of the trappings, excessive houses, clingers-on ... and doing away with backhanders (Charles) and paedophiles (Andrew).
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
"The threats picked up after misinformation spread online that suggested the hospital performed gender-affirming genital surgeries on young children.
Boston Children’s says it provides overall care to children who identify as transgender or nonbinary, but surgeries are performed only on consenting adults.
“Age 18 is used to reflect the standard age of majority for medical decision-making. Boston Children’s does not perform genital surgeries as part of gender-affirming care on a patient under the age of 18,” the statement says. "
My perspective on the 'american culture war' is as follows:
This begun in universities in the late 2010's, where college professors were being unseated on vague, spurious accusations relating to 'racism'; the universities lost their ability to control it, and it exploded massively in 2020, breaking out of university and 'infecting' the whole of society, which became consumed by an irrational revolutionary fervour, a sort of 'toxic mix' of revolutionary france and the salem witch trials.
The right initially started to fight it by appeals to discourse and reason, but it failed. So in 2021/2022 they resorted to fighting it by any means possible, weaponising appeals to religion (abortion) and the fear of child abuse, and despatching their own 'cancel culture' towards ideas they dislike (ie critical race theory), with some success.
It is true that both sides are now basically as bad as each other, but to find a resolution to the issue, you have to stop automatically and reflexively taking the side of the left, which is what a majority of posters on here do. It gets very tiring to observe, otherwise smart and intelligent people coming across as fellow travellers supporting the revolution.
To add... bombings of public buildings are not a new low in this war, they were seen a lot in 2020 for instance.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
I was on an academic update day. It wasn't mentioned by any of the speakers, nor did I hear anything said about the death at coffee breaks, just the usual chat about the topics discussed and the planning of the Christmas Party.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
"The threats picked up after misinformation spread online that suggested the hospital performed gender-affirming genital surgeries on young children.
Boston Children’s says it provides overall care to children who identify as transgender or nonbinary, but surgeries are performed only on consenting adults.
“Age 18 is used to reflect the standard age of majority for medical decision-making. Boston Children’s does not perform genital surgeries as part of gender-affirming care on a patient under the age of 18,” the statement says. "
My perspective on the 'american culture war' is as follows:
This begun in universities in the late 2010's, where college professors were being unseated on vague, spurious accusations relating to 'racism'; the universities lost their ability to control it, and it exploded massively in 2020, breaking out of university and 'infecting' the whole of society, which became consumed by an irrational revolutionary fervour, a sort of 'toxic mix' of revolutionary france and the salem witch trials.
The right initially started to fight it by appeals to discourse and reason, but it failed. So in 2021/2022 they resorted to fighting it by any means possible, weaponising appeals to religion (abortion) and the fear of child abuse, and despatching their own 'cancel culture' towards ideas they dislike (ie critical race theory), with some success.
It is true that both sides are now basically as bad as each other, but to find a resolution to the issue, you have to stop automatically and reflexively taking the side of the left, which is what a majority of posters on here do. It gets very tiring to observe, otherwise smart and intelligent people coming across as fellow travellers supporting the revolution.
To add... bombings of public buildings are not a new low in this war, they were seen a lot in 2020 for instance.
Respectfully, that seems like a very partial interpretation of the American culture wars. What was McCarthyism if not a culture war? I’m sure the left have their share of the blame but it’s hypocritical in the extreme to say that it originated with them. Throughout most of the 20th century the majority of censorship was done in the name of conservatism.
We watched all.of the BBC output last night. Not to be missed was the Radio 4. I think, 2 hr special on the Queen"s life. A very good piece of broadcasting from the impartial "When we have won the Election" Naughtie
The first Truss ministry has been very competent so far. The stuff announced in the energy package had clearly been worked on behind the scenes by herself and Kwasi for a while. The country is being run by a management accountant rather than a columnist.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
I was on an academic update day. It wasn't mentioned by any of the speakers, nor did I hear anything said about the death at coffee breaks, just the usual chat about the topics discussed and the planning of the Christmas Party.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
If you had met the Queen you would have given deference ,whatever you left wing republican views might be. It is equivalent to champagne socialism.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
I was on an academic update day. It wasn't mentioned by any of the speakers, nor did I hear anything said about the death at coffee breaks, just the usual chat about the topics discussed and the planning of the Christmas Party.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
I think it is sad the media just goes so over the top with a lot of time filling and stupid interviews. As a consequence I switch off and then miss the key stuff while avoiding the dross. As a consequence I missed Charles's speech (didn't even know it had happened until this morning and still haven't heard it) and HofC speeches.
Good morning one and all. Not as bright this morning; autumnal! I shall be very glad to get back to normal TV programmes. I trust I will be able to sit and watch the cricket this afternoon, although I never have been very keen on Saturday after evenings programs! We did watch some of the life of the Queen last night and I formed the impression that some of us have been pre-recorded. I suppose it's like newspapers keeping obituaries on file!
Ukraine reports a very high Russian casualty rate these days. 650 KIA a day has not been uncommon, typically you’d assume double that wounded, meaning around 2,000 daily casualties for Russia. Usually comes out about 8am BST.
It doesn’t say where these occurring. It’s plausible that most of them are still being taken in Kherson, where Russia concentrated its forces and where the military process for Ukraine is one of careful but grinding attrition of the enemy, with territorial gains there eventually taking care of themselves. While the Kharkiv offensive is all about a lightning advance into largely abandoned defensive positions.
Also for those that missed it, the key rail hub town Kupyansk seems to have been taken overnight without much of a fight. It was 60km behind enemy lines when Boris and Liz went to see the Queen. It pretty much cuts of the Russian garrison on Izyum, without which they cannot win the battle of Donbas. The Ukrainians are now also advancing to Izyum from two axes to the south and south east, potentially setting up another Attrition Zone as they have done in Kherson.
There are early murmurings that the advance was made possible by the mass surrenders of part of the army of so called Luhansk People’s Republic. If so, it doesn’t bode well for Russia’s chances of stemming the advance as we move through winter into spring.
The first Truss ministry has been very competent so far. The stuff announced in the energy package had clearly been worked on behind the scenes by herself and Kwasi for a while. The country is being run by a management accountant rather than a columnist.
Let’s see what’s been announced first. Is it correct that they’re going to delay announcing any details for two weeks while ‘the nation mourns’ ?
Interesting, fun debate between @Leon and @HYUFD this morning. Nicely done. Also nice to see @hyufd arguing from a perspective opposite to what one would expect. Each post swayed me and made me smile.
Expecting @rcs1000 to now carry out his previous threat to ban me for being a sycophant.
The bits where stuff is happening are important bits of history, Charles speech; the accession council, obviously the funeral, the coronation. I doubt most people are interested in Wark and Witchell's endless filler though.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
I was on an academic update day. It wasn't mentioned by any of the speakers, nor did I hear anything said about the death at coffee breaks, just the usual chat about the topics discussed and the planning of the Christmas Party.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
If you had met the Queen you would have given deference ,whatever you left wing republican views might be. It is equivalent to champagne socialism.
I am not a republican, nor left wing, and have met the Queen, neither do I like Champagne or preach Socialism so wrong on all counts.
The Queen had a good innings, but the media - when in doubt - will always go over the top. At least, it doesn't have the mawkish quality that Diana's death produced.
It's not just Royalty. When Michael Jackson kicked the bucket, I could put the TV on a week later to see that the breaking news was that he was still dead.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
I was on an academic update day. It wasn't mentioned by any of the speakers, nor did I hear anything said about the death at coffee breaks, just the usual chat about the topics discussed and the planning of the Christmas Party.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
I think it is sad the media just goes so over the top with a lot of time filling and stupid interviews. As a consequence I switch off and then miss the key stuff while avoiding the dross. As a consequence I missed Charles's speech (didn't even know it had happened until this morning and still haven't heard it) and HofC speeches.
The media just goes silly and drives me away.
I agree. The endless talking heads pontificating about the Queens love of horses or who will look after her corgies is approaching the point of satire.
So I hate to break it to you fellow train fans, but it looks like they're going to fly Elizabeth to London
Phew, I'd gathered that a slowly moving catafalque on rails with sobbing Scottish peasantry tugging their forelocks as it passed was going to kill Narionalism (Scotch variety) stone dead. Another bullet swerved!
NEW: UK confirms Ukraine launched offensive operations against Russian forces in Kharkiv region on 6 Sept, advancing up to 50km into previously 🇷🇺-held territory. “Russian forces were likely taken by surprise”. If🇺🇦 retakes town of Kupiansk this = “a significant blow” to Russia https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1568467240869150727
"The threats picked up after misinformation spread online that suggested the hospital performed gender-affirming genital surgeries on young children.
Boston Children’s says it provides overall care to children who identify as transgender or nonbinary, but surgeries are performed only on consenting adults.
“Age 18 is used to reflect the standard age of majority for medical decision-making. Boston Children’s does not perform genital surgeries as part of gender-affirming care on a patient under the age of 18,” the statement says. "
My perspective on the 'american culture war' is as follows:
This begun in universities in the late 2010's, where college professors were being unseated on vague, spurious accusations relating to 'racism'; the universities lost their ability to control it, and it exploded massively in 2020, breaking out of university and 'infecting' the whole of society, which became consumed by an irrational revolutionary fervour, a sort of 'toxic mix' of revolutionary france and the salem witch trials.
The right initially started to fight it by appeals to discourse and reason, but it failed. So in 2021/2022 they resorted to fighting it by any means possible, weaponising appeals to religion (abortion) and the fear of child abuse, and despatching their own 'cancel culture' towards ideas they dislike (ie critical race theory), with some success.
It is true that both sides are now basically as bad as each other, but to find a resolution to the issue, you have to stop automatically and reflexively taking the side of the left, which is what a majority of posters on here do. It gets very tiring to observe, otherwise smart and intelligent people coming across as fellow travellers supporting the revolution.
To add... bombings of public buildings are not a new low in this war, they were seen a lot in 2020 for instance.
Respectfully, that seems like a very partial interpretation of the American culture wars. What was McCarthyism if not a culture war? I’m sure the left have their share of the blame but it’s hypocritical in the extreme to say that it originated with them. Throughout most of the 20th century the majority of censorship was done in the name of conservatism.
You can't avoid having a discussion about something because it is too hard to find a starting point. That is just dodging the issue. I would say the current wave of problems did start in the 2010's, mainly because the 'left' could not come to terms with Donald Trump.
The democrats are not dealing with the left at all, they seem to have bought in to it all completely.
To my mind, looking at the situation as it was in 2020; I can easily see and understand why Americans vote for Trump and the Republicans, I would probably do the same if I was American.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the decisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
No the election of Margaret Thatcher in 1979 was an order of magnitude more significant, for good or ill.
Will the Stone of Scone (once famously liberated by Scottish nationalists) be taken to Westminster Abbey and placed under the coronation chair (once attacked with explosives by campaigners' for women's right to vote) for the coronation?
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
In case you didn't know (but most of you do) the Accession Council will begin - and be televised for first time ever - at 10.00am UK time at St James Palace, for purpose of formally proclaiming King Charles III.
Have to say, "televised for the first time ever" is a minor distinction, given the last one was in 1952. I can't imagine how the next one will be "shared" but I suspect realtime broadcast television will be an historical curiosity by then.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Obviously everyone's experiences will differ, but what I'm seeing corresponds more closely with Nick's assessment than yours.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
I was on an academic update day. It wasn't mentioned by any of the speakers, nor did I hear anything said about the death at coffee breaks, just the usual chat about the topics discussed and the planning of the Christmas Party.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
The rituals are irrelevant to daily life and they understandably mean very little to most people. But, for me, it is still important that they happen and are seen to happen. I also like the fact that there are endless talking heads all over the terrestrial and news channels - not because I want to watch them or find them particularly engaging, but because the rolling coverage reflects the importance of what is happening. Everything else has been dropped. That's the bit that matters. This is the first time the head of state has ever changed during my lifetime. That is a pretty big deal. Obviously, everyone sees it differently, I don't begrudge anyone their views on this. But for me, it's all working fine!
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
In this grave hour, perhaps the most fateful in our history...
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
As I posted yesterday cancelling the last night of the Proms was really stupid. It could have been a real celebration in a typical British manner and with one of the first renditions of God Save the King.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I for one am watching history in the making as an history enthusiast. Is monarchy relevant to most people's daily lives? No.
Good thread summarising the recent events in Ukraine. What happens in next few days will be interesting.
https://twitter.com/maria_drutska/status/1568354385113096205 Mid-July to late August, Ukraine systematically targeted russian supply lines around Kherson, Kharkiv, Crimea, Donbas & other areas. The 80km HIMARS range, and other undisclosed arms allowed clinical strikes. The AFU warned of an imminent Kherson counter offensive…
"The threats picked up after misinformation spread online that suggested the hospital performed gender-affirming genital surgeries on young children.
Boston Children’s says it provides overall care to children who identify as transgender or nonbinary, but surgeries are performed only on consenting adults.
“Age 18 is used to reflect the standard age of majority for medical decision-making. Boston Children’s does not perform genital surgeries as part of gender-affirming care on a patient under the age of 18,” the statement says. "
My perspective on the 'american culture war' is as follows:
This begun in universities in the late 2010's, where college professors were being unseated on vague, spurious accusations relating to 'racism'; the universities lost their ability to control it, and it exploded massively in 2020, breaking out of university and 'infecting' the whole of society, which became consumed by an irrational revolutionary fervour, a sort of 'toxic mix' of revolutionary france and the salem witch trials.
The right initially started to fight it by appeals to discourse and reason, but it failed. So in 2021/2022 they resorted to fighting it by any means possible, weaponising appeals to religion (abortion) and the fear of child abuse, and despatching their own 'cancel culture' towards ideas they dislike (ie critical race theory), with some success.
It is true that both sides are now basically as bad as each other, but to find a resolution to the issue, you have to stop automatically and reflexively taking the side of the left, which is what a majority of posters on here do. It gets very tiring to observe, otherwise smart and intelligent people coming across as fellow travellers supporting the revolution.
To add... bombings of public buildings are not a new low in this war, they were seen a lot in 2020 for instance.
Respectfully, that seems like a very partial interpretation of the American culture wars. What was McCarthyism if not a culture war? I’m sure the left have their share of the blame but it’s hypocritical in the extreme to say that it originated with them. Throughout most of the 20th century the majority of censorship was done in the name of conservatism.
You can't avoid having a discussion about something because it is too hard to find a starting point. That is just dodging the issue. I would say the current wave of problems did start in the 2010's, mainly because the 'left' could not come to terms with Donald Trump.
The democrats are not dealing with the left at all, they seem to have bought in to it all completely.
To my mind, looking at the situation as it was in 2020; I can easily see and understand why Americans vote for Trump and the Republicans, I would probably do the same if I was American.
I’m not dodging the issue but to say “This begun in universities in the late 2010's” is absolutely absurd, as if cultural censorship didn’t exist before them. You’re looking at your own political inclination and working back to the date that’s easiest to justify it.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
I was listening to one of the war experts a few days ago on telly, and he reckoned the Ukranian counter-attack would be chronic rather than acute. However, the thing to watch for was if Putin became desperate and moved the reserve army from Russia towards Kherson to prevent its fall.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the deisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
Do you mean the reserve Corps to the Kharkiv front? The Kherson front seems to be holding for Russia still.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
The Kherson pocket can only be taken quickly with a high Ukrainian casualty rate. We’re seeing instead something resembling siege warfare there. Perhaps 20k Russian soldiers largely cut off from supply lines, now being attritted at a very high rate. One assumes the territory West of the Dnipro will be static and then will suddenly move all at once.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
I'm pretty sure the King doesnt intend for it to happen again, not to mention his security detail.
In case you didn't know (but most of you do) the Accession Council will begin - and be televised for first time ever - at 10.00am UK time at St James Palace, for purpose of formally proclaiming King Charles III.
Have to say, "televised for the first time ever" is a minor distinction, given the last one was in 1952. I can't imagine how the next one will be "shared" but I suspect realtime broadcast television will be an historical curiosity by then.
Doubt it. To be realistic about it, the next one could be in just ten years or so.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
So I hate to break it to you fellow train fans, but it looks like they're going to fly Elizabeth to London
Phew, I'd gathered that a slowly moving catafalque on rails with sobbing Scottish peasantry tugging their forelocks as it passed was going to kill Narionalism (Scotch variety) stone dead. Another bullet swerved!
Quite relieved re the Edin-LOndon bit - fried/squashed peasantry does not look good on the news. Pantographs, wires and leccy don't go with hordes flinging bouquets from bridges and level crossings, never mind crowds who are so intent on the RT they miss the one coming in the other direction.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
They are going to do serious, really serious damage to themselves. OK so a full state funeral is in order. But beyond that? We're about to see all of the trappings and wealth and otherness of the monarchy. People are heading into this winter in a real crisis over how to keep their children fed and warm.
Setting a new unpayable £2,500 price cap (which you plebs can all pay for over the next 10 years) does not fix the crisis - it only stops it getting worse. The previous price cap was already unpayable for too many, with schools already seeing kids coming in cold and hungry. That won't change, especially with this government and heir parrots sneering away that "we have fixed this crisis" when they have instead cemented it into place.
Compare and contrast hat real, lived disaster in people's lives with the lavish pomp and pageantry to come, and the planning for an even more lavish crowning of the new King. This is bad - for them.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
She has only been in office for a few days. To draw any conclusion is foolhardy. Let's see where we are in a year's time.
She is likely to grow into the role - that is true. But we don't need to wait for her with regards to policy. Its all there on display, and its awful.
Though to be fair, Truss has shown admirable pragmatism, with her ditching of regional pay and simply ginormous energy handout. Both the necessary things to do, but not what she or her dry libertarian fans would have wanted.
I think she is still in trouble; she's chosen not to play with a full deck, and even if Ukraine goes well, the next couple of years look bad- just less bad.
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
“The only history is social history “ gives me real Howard Kirk in The History Man vibes.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
“The only history is social history “ gives me real Howard Kirk in The History Man vibes.
Confining history to kings and queens is so 1066 and All That.
Twitter: as of 8am yesterday the Ukrainian Army had recaptured 1000 Sq Km of the country
as of 8am today the Ukrainian Army has recaptured 2500 Sq Km of the country
This is a bewilderingly speedy collapse. When do the Russians stop, regroup and resist? Can they?
Its a disgrace. Don't the Ukrainians know its a time of national, no GLOBAL mourning? The liberation of their people is inappropriate at this time. Cancel it like they did the football.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
It's not history. The only history is social history, not the doings of a family at the top of the social hierarchy as they play dress-up surrounded by hangers-on.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
The queen’s death seems to have unsettled you. Why don’t you switch off and turn to the coverage of Ukraine’s counteroffensive to cheer you up instead?
I really got to some of the monarchists here when I said their emotions were going haywire because a rich old lady died in a castle, didn't I? And you come out with the same old line that I must be a pro-Kremlin traitor for saying so.
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
I am dipping in and out of the coverage, but what is happening is in my mind constantly. I saw the Truss and Starmer speeches in the Commons as they happened, I tuned in to Charles. But I do find the rolling, repetitive coverage a bit tedious. I understand why others wouldn’t but I prefer to think it all through without the talking heads.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
Yep, that's a very good piece. I do think that the Queen's death will accelerate change - from snail's pace to slow only, but it will be noticeable.
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
Someone on PB was claiming that that would cement the RF forever in the nation's affections etc. etc.
For me, it is a very strong indicator that the new King's relationship with the British people is going to be very different to the one the Queen had. It will be much, much less deferential, much less serious. I am not sure that translates into deep affection, though.
Hopefully Truss' response to this week's events will give her some gravitas. While her cost of living proposals will make a difference
I think she has been overshadowed somewhat by Boris Johnsons speech to parliament about the Queen which was one of his best .
Are most people watching the speeches? I know lots of ardent monarchists around here, who are properly sad - as as quite a few non-monarchists - but I don't know anyone who is following all the eulogies and retrospectives - everyone says it's just too much, and *especially* when they're sad. Quite a few saw Charles, and catch oddments on the radio, but most seem to be putting it aside for their private lives.
Yes, I watched all of it. From last night at 5.55pm onwards. We were glued to all the BBC's schedule.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Fair enough. I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives. My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate. I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
Everyone should spend 9 minutes watching the new King's speech. And, I mean *everyone*.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
I did. We are watching living history. And I watched the first few speeches in Parliament. And I may dip in to other bits.
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
I’d agree with that. It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
They are going to do serious, really serious damage to themselves. OK so a full state funeral is in order. But beyond that? We're about to see all of the trappings and wealth and otherness of the monarchy. People are heading into this winter in a real crisis over how to keep their children fed and warm.
Setting a new unpayable £2,500 price cap (which you plebs can all pay for over the next 10 years) does not fix the crisis - it only stops it getting worse. The previous price cap was already unpayable for too many, with schools already seeing kids coming in cold and hungry. That won't change, especially with this government and heir parrots sneering away that "we have fixed this crisis" when they have instead cemented it into place.
Compare and contrast hat real, lived disaster in people's lives with the lavish pomp and pageantry to come, and the planning for an even more lavish crowning of the new King. This is bad - for them.
Nah. If it has any impact at all it will be to entrench positions. Those that lived the queen / the monarchy will love it even more after the pomp and ceremony. Those that thought them hangers on will think as you say.
What’s interesting is those in the middle. I’ve been pretty ambivalent about the monarchy for a while, even though ERII was herself a champion. “What’s it all for?” was something that I struggled to have a good answer to. But I think seeing how this week is playing out, I start to understand. It allows extreme change under the cover of remarkable continuity and stability.
Comments
@tobiaschneider
I'm trying not to lap up every rumor circulating around Telegram, but the main challenge in establishing a clear picture of the situation in Kharkiv appears to be that Russian lines are collapsing faster than Ukraine can even advance and clear liberated areas. Astonishing.
https://twitter.com/tobiaschneider/status/1568343234228748289
I always used to love how London was number one, even for the oddest pairs: Yen-to-Philippine Peso? It'll be London first, followed by Tokyo second and Manila third.
AND why leave out Saxe, Coburg, Gotha, Tudor, Stuart, Hanover, Sonderburg, Glücksburg, etc., etc.
There was some stuff I saw earlier about the Ukrainians capturing some seriously obsolete (1950s) artillery. This was beyond rolling out the old 122mm stuff.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/17/health/boston-hospital-gender-affirming-care-threat/index.html
"The threats picked up after misinformation spread online that suggested the hospital performed gender-affirming genital surgeries on young children.
Boston Children’s says it provides overall care to children who identify as transgender or nonbinary, but surgeries are performed only on consenting adults.
“Age 18 is used to reflect the standard age of majority for medical decision-making. Boston Children’s does not perform genital surgeries as part of gender-affirming care on a patient under the age of 18,” the statement says. "
But what do I know.
The media are screaming practically wall to wall that the monarchy represents the whole country and that an elderly woman with a palace and a couple of castles had a place in almost everyone's heart. Well how about a media organisation commissions a poll to find out whether that's true or not and publishes the results. Retain the monarchy or abolish it - see how the population feel about that question when a pollster rings them up and asks them. ASKS them. Not TELLS them what they think, which is what politicians of all parties and the entire media are doing right now. No cueing. No pictures of an elderly woman, or guys wearing medals, or good-looking young women either. No Range Rovers. No glamour. Just ask them and find out. What's the problem with that?
The progress of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in the east, paired with slower, more limited gains in the south, represents some of the most significant changes to the frontlines of the war in months.
The exact positions of Ukrainian forces around Izium could not be independently confirmed. The Russian military released a video with what it said were reinforcements headed to the Kharkiv area, but it has not made detailed statements about the status of the fighting.
But military analysts, satellite detections and photos and videos of Ukrainian forces indicate that they moved rapidly east toward Kupiansk in recent days, possibly getting close to the outskirts of the city. Capturing Kupiansk could threaten Russian supply lines to Izium. And the Ukrainian military claimed to capture the city of Balakliya, prompting Russian military bloggers to complain that Russia was poorly prepared.
The situation is fluid, and further Ukrainian gains may be more heavily contested as Russia stabilizes its response.
Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the east came in parallel to a push in the south that it had prepared for months, around the regional capital, Kherson. Russia was forced to redeploy troops to shore up its defenses in this area, which may have left its remaining forces in the east more thinly spread.
Ukrainian advances in the south have been slower. Ukrainian troops are fighting to push Russian troops back from the western side of the Dnipro river, which Russia has controlled since the first week of the invasion. After 12 days of intense fighting and shelling, Ukrainian forces have reclaimed a number of small settlements along the frontline.
Despite the successes, Ukrainian officials have warned that it will be a slow grind to reclaim more territory. Russian forces have shifted to defensive positions and have heavily mined the surrounding area.
The advances follow weeks of Ukrainian strikes on Russian equipment behind the frontlines, including ammunition depots and command posts.
I wouldn't say "all". Amazon, for example, recently banned "When Harry Becomes Sally". I immediately bought a copy from Barnes and Noble, and have mostly stopped buying books from Amazon. (Oddly, Amazon has not, yet anyway, banned Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage".)
I wouldn't walk around on most campuses with a copy of Nicholas Wade's "A Troublesome Ineritance", without disguising it, somehow.
And for decades, leftists have had trouble with "Huckleberry Finn." (I think "All the KIng's Men" would be problematic in many places, too.)
“At the council, which starts at 10:00 BST, the King will make a personal declaration about the death of the Queen and make an oath to preserve the Church of Scotland - because in Scotland there is a division of powers between church and state.”
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Millions-Women-are-Waiting-Meet/dp/0747585563
Well, on some campuses, being seen carrying that book could endanger one's career. Seriously.
You may or may not consider that a "ban", just as I might not consider a school choosing the stories and books to put in -- and not to put in -- its curriculum and library, a ban. I suppose there are a few schools around the world that do not make such choices, but I don't know of any government-supported grade scholols that don't make such decisions.
For example, do grade schools in Britain include pornography in their libraries? If they don't, is that a "ban"?
Here's an example from my childhood: Back in the 1950's, I saw a middle grade reader that included a story about a Soviet kid, during World War II. And then a year or two later, that story had been replaced by a story about a Yugoslav kid. Was that a ban?
(For the record: In the US, actual government "bans" of books mostly went out with court decisions years ago. But, since you were using "ban" more loosely, as often happens now, I did, too.)
No, I don't think so. She is awful.
I overheard someone in a shop, middle class type, kicking off about her. Said Sunak would at least have been competent.
Liz Truss is a gift to Labour.
My wife and I will be watching the accession proclamation from 9.30am tomorrow. We are also going to church for a community service at 10.30am tomorrow - we are not religious.
You are wrong.
Beginning?
I am hearing some people complain that is overkill; but most appear to be acknowledging the situation as something going on in the background, but want to get on with their lives.
My son's headteacher was dressed in black, which I thought was appropriate.
I've not watched any of the speeches etc personally.
It doesn’t say where these occurring. It’s plausible that most of them are still being taken in Kherson, where Russia concentrated its forces and where the military process for Ukraine is one of careful but grinding attrition of the enemy, with territorial gains there eventually taking care of themselves. While the Kharkiv offensive is all about a lightning advance into largely abandoned defensive positions.
It's probably the most significant and historical national moment in this country for the last 70 years.
Watch it.
Not interested in the monarchy. Not interested in Charles.
And your hyperbolic nonsense only makes me more certain that I, along with millions of others, am right not to bother.
She lived a full life. She served this country for a very long time and I think many people have a lot of respect for what she did.
But putting their lives on hold? Staying glued to the television? No.
As for Charles, ambivalence at best. Everyone I know thinks it's time they came up to date, which would mean stripping away lots of the trappings, excessive houses, clingers-on ... and doing away with backhanders (Charles) and paedophiles (Andrew).
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/d90a1024-307d-11ed-b83f-5047a2e76e8e?shareToken=592874ca5f43657012b15b62288d8fc8
It seems rather likely that opinions simply differ on this, as so many other things.
We were at the theatre last night, along with the usual crowd of oldies and a gratifyingly larger smattering of youngsters than usual. I was expecting perhaps a minute of silence, but no, there was no indication whatsoever that anything was out of the ordinary, and I didn't hear the death of the Queen mentioned once during the interval. This was a small local theatre in a safe Tory constituency, btw, true blue territory.
This begun in universities in the late 2010's, where college professors were being unseated on vague, spurious accusations relating to 'racism'; the universities lost their ability to control it, and it exploded massively in 2020, breaking out of university and 'infecting' the whole of society, which became consumed by an irrational revolutionary fervour, a sort of 'toxic mix' of revolutionary france and the salem witch trials.
The right initially started to fight it by appeals to discourse and reason, but it failed. So in 2021/2022 they resorted to fighting it by any means possible, weaponising appeals to religion (abortion) and the fear of child abuse, and despatching their own 'cancel culture' towards ideas they dislike (ie critical race theory), with some success.
It is true that both sides are now basically as bad as each other, but to find a resolution to the issue, you have to stop automatically and reflexively taking the side of the left, which is what a majority of posters on here do. It gets very tiring to observe, otherwise smart and intelligent people coming across as fellow travellers supporting the revolution.
To add... bombings of public buildings are not a new low in this war, they were seen a lot in 2020 for instance.
It isn't callousness, just the irrelevance to daily life. An hour or two in the evening to update on events would be plenty. The antiquated rituals of theme park Britain are of only minor interest.
The stuff announced in the energy package had clearly been worked on behind the scenes by herself and Kwasi for a while.
The country is being run by a management accountant rather than a columnist.
And I agree with Casino: that Charles speech was extraordinary. It was so very moving, but went way beyond that. Duty was central, of course, as was the love he had for his mother. However, there were important references to Parliamentary democracy, multiculturalism, the marginalised and even to republicanism. He made plain his deep love for both his sons and their families - and he showed emotion in a way his mother never did.
The monarchy moves forward. We now have a King with no direct links to either WW2 or Empire. Those ties to our past the Queen so magnificently embodied are gone. Over time that will matter a lot.
The media just goes silly and drives me away.
I shall be very glad to get back to normal TV programmes. I trust I will be able to sit and watch the cricket this afternoon, although I never have been very keen on Saturday after evenings programs!
We did watch some of the life of the Queen last night and I formed the impression that some of us have been pre-recorded. I suppose it's like newspapers keeping obituaries on file!
There are early murmurings that the advance was made possible by the mass surrenders of part of the army of so called Luhansk People’s Republic. If so, it doesn’t bode well for Russia’s chances of stemming the advance as we move through winter into spring.
Is it correct that they’re going to delay announcing any details for two weeks while ‘the nation mourns’ ?
Expecting @rcs1000 to now carry out his previous threat to ban me for being a sycophant.
I doubt most people are interested in Wark and Witchell's endless filler though.
It's not just Royalty. When Michael Jackson kicked the bucket, I could put the TV on a week later to see that the breaking news was that he was still dead.
King Charles may find it a lot to live up to.
The democrats are not dealing with the left at all, they seem to have bought in to it all completely.
To my mind, looking at the situation as it was in 2020; I can easily see and understand why Americans vote for Trump and the Republicans, I would probably do the same if I was American.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/09/queen-test-divided-britain-constitution
But there is a very serious point here. It is 2022, and the BBC no longer dominates broadcast media. Shutting down everything to broadcast weeks of wailing and tearing of clothes will do significant damage to the Beeb.
She was great, she died, its sad. But we all have lives and the idea that we cancel the Last Night of the Proms instead of running it in tribute to the country she serves is truly stupid. Same with cancelling football matches. The age of deference is long gone, and unless the powers that be realise this and quickly there is a serious likelihood of them damaging the status quo.
He had doubts about their quality, but that could be the decisive move. Of course, he was cut off short by the interviewer who thought she should be the centre of attention.
I am impressed with the skill of the UKR forces, offensive operations being so much more difficult than defensive. They should be able to consolidate before the mud season bogs down everything.
It does serve to preserve the illusion for those who are, that the entire nation is in mourning. But I think that’s possibly a mistake, as you say.
I am neither a republican, nor completely insensible to HMQ’s passing, but thank heavens for Netflix.
https://twitter.com/maria_drutska/status/1568354385113096205
Mid-July to late August, Ukraine systematically targeted russian supply lines around Kherson, Kharkiv, Crimea, Donbas & other areas. The 80km HIMARS range, and other undisclosed arms allowed clinical strikes. The AFU warned of an imminent Kherson counter offensive…
as of 8am today the Ukrainian Army has recaptured 2500 Sq Km of the country
This is a bewilderingly speedy collapse. When do the Russians stop, regroup and resist? Can they?
King Charles, our sovereign, allowed a member of the public to kiss him yesterday. Had anyone done it to the Queen it would have been shocking beyond words. It's just unthinkable it could ever have happened.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1568491972108734467
Russian base destroyed in Velykyi Burluk, Kharkiv Oblast…
Velykyi Burluk lies 40 km away north of Kupiansk on one of two roads connecting Kupiansk to Russia.
From a strategic perspective, the Ukrainians have fought rope-a-dope warfare. Russia has exhausted itself without getting very far in its own strategic objectives, while Ukraine kept stinging like a bee. “1000 bee stings a day” is how someone reported their single minded focus on destroying fuel vehicles, ammo dumps and infrastructure bottle necks.
If they keep ladling it on as thick as they've been doing, they may well find that support for the monarchy suddenly falls down a pit.
The retard on the throne could easily put his foot in his mouth big time, and then BANG it all goes.
Where's Harry, out of interest?
Setting a new unpayable £2,500 price cap (which you plebs can all pay for over the next 10 years) does not fix the crisis - it only stops it getting worse. The previous price cap was already unpayable for too many, with schools already seeing kids coming in cold and hungry. That won't change, especially with this government and heir parrots sneering away that "we have fixed this crisis" when they have instead cemented it into place.
Compare and contrast hat real, lived disaster in people's lives with the lavish pomp and pageantry to come, and the planning for an even more lavish crowning of the new King. This is bad - for them.
I think she is still in trouble; she's chosen not to play with a full deck, and even if Ukraine goes well, the next couple of years look bad- just less bad.
https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1568489339646091264
Also, "retard"?
Your certainties as symbolically crystallised in feudal imagery could be about to fall apart...which you may already know.
I asked "Where's Harry?" The Torygraph say "With the death of his grandmother, Harry has never looked so alone". Scared, much?
What’s interesting is those in the middle. I’ve been pretty ambivalent about the monarchy for a while, even though ERII was herself a champion. “What’s it all for?” was something that I struggled to have a good answer to. But I think seeing how
this week is playing out, I start to understand. It allows extreme change under the cover of remarkable continuity and stability.