143/3 at halfway for Pakistan, on par with England’s dire performance yesterday despite a good stand from Rizwan and Saud. If they can keep this partnership going for another few overs, Pakistan may have an opportunity to open up towards the end.
Are these day/night games all going to favour the team winning the toss and electing to field?
Why on earth are you “pro Scottish independence”? Do you want to see the UK broken up? Why?
IIRC you are a staunch Remoaner. All the arguments against Brexit apply - tenfold - to Scottish separatism. For a start it would cause economic depression in Scotland, deep recession in the rUK, and grievous pain and chaos for millions of people, for a decade
How can you desire that?
I know several people who hold these twin positions - ardent Remainerism and pro Indy - and I’ve never understood how they can be so glibly reconciled
I do, for t he same reason I voted for Brexit.
Yes the same arguments for Brexit apply. Which is why I voted for Brexit, and why I support Sindy.
I voted for Brexit on the grounds of democracy and sovereignty. Inside the EU Britain was governed by an unelected elite of Eurocrats in a foreign country
None of this applies to Scotland. Scotland is governed by the MPs we all elect to Westminster (in our national capital), who sit in an entirely democratic chamber with the power to propose, enact and repeal laws
If the Scots decide they loathe the government they, like all Britons, can kick them out at the next election. None of us was able to eject Ursula von der Leyen
And the 99.7% of us who aren't Tory members had no say in the imposition of the Trusster or Rishi.
I have no issue with parliament deciding who has the confidence of the House, that is their role, and we will get our say soon.
It's who they decide on and what that person does which matters.
There is no perfect way of doing these things. It was a point in comparison to the appointment of der Leyen.
I know, but it's not a very good one nonetheless. I agree that point gets overblown and overegged, but that stock retort just doesn't work for me since it requires the idea we should not be able to switch PMs without a GE, yet we've done that many many times. So it just falls flat.
If we had a proper constitution, not something that each successive government can change as it pleases (see FTPA), we could have written in it that if a PM changes mid-term there has to be a GE within 6 months. That would fix that issue.
That might be a good idea, but I do push back at the 'proper constitution' bit. Like most such arguments I think it assumes a codified constitution solves more problems than it does (a bit like how PR may be a good idea - I think so - but some people suggest it will magically improve the quality of our politicians somehow too).
FTPA is an interesting point, since your suggestion (which I'd support as a law) is akin to what the Act was attempting, by codifying more rules around election timing rather than relying on convention and governmental whim. Yet it was bypassed easily and both main parties were going to junk it. Why would it being in a constitution prevent that from happening? You could make things harder to change, but they still could be.
Good point
Everyone used to admire the US Constitution but it doesn’t look so good now, with the right to bear arms proving “problematic” and the politicisation of the judiciary becoming evermore poisonous
There is a flexible genius in an unwritten constitution like ours. We could easily replace it with something written and WORSE
Under the current system what is to stop any elected majority government, left or right, passing a law to ban future elections and let themselves remain in power ad infinitum?
Nothing, except the process, which either requires the passage of a bill through both Houses of Parliament and the assent of the King or, if they tried to issue an order in council, then it would still require the assent of the King, or in his absence, then at least two of the seven counsellors of state, though the legal presumption is that counsellors may not act to dissolve Parliament except on the express command of the King.
In any event, the Crown remains the ultimate back stop to prevent such change.
In fact the UK DOES have a written constitution, it is just not written down in one place, but comprises a very large body of legislation, common law and conventions.
So a coup could occur but would probably be illegal, which may not be much comfort, of course.
Why on earth are you “pro Scottish independence”? Do you want to see the UK broken up? Why?
IIRC you are a staunch Remoaner. All the arguments against Brexit apply - tenfold - to Scottish separatism. For a start it would cause economic depression in Scotland, deep recession in the rUK, and grievous pain and chaos for millions of people, for a decade
How can you desire that?
I know several people who hold these twin positions - ardent Remainerism and pro Indy - and I’ve never understood how they can be so glibly reconciled
I do, for t he same reason I voted for Brexit.
Yes the same arguments for Brexit apply. Which is why I voted for Brexit, and why I support Sindy.
I voted for Brexit on the grounds of democracy and sovereignty. Inside the EU Britain was governed by an unelected elite of Eurocrats in a foreign country
None of this applies to Scotland. Scotland is governed by the MPs we all elect to Westminster (in our national capital), who sit in an entirely democratic chamber with the power to propose, enact and repeal laws
If the Scots decide they loathe the government they, like all Britons, can kick them out at the next election. None of us was able to eject Ursula von der Leyen
And the 99.7% of us who aren't Tory members had no say in the imposition of the Trusster or Rishi.
I have no issue with parliament deciding who has the confidence of the House, that is their role, and we will get our say soon.
It's who they decide on and what that person does which matters.
There is no perfect way of doing these things. It was a point in comparison to the appointment of der Leyen.
I know, but it's not a very good one nonetheless. I agree that point gets overblown and overegged, but that stock retort just doesn't work for me since it requires the idea we should not be able to switch PMs without a GE, yet we've done that many many times. So it just falls flat.
If we had a proper constitution, not something that each successive government can change as it pleases (see FTPA), we could have written in it that if a PM changes mid-term there has to be a GE within 6 months. That would fix that issue.
That might be a good idea, but I do push back at the 'proper constitution' bit. Like most such arguments I think it assumes a codified constitution solves more problems than it does (a bit like how PR may be a good idea - I think so - but some people suggest it will magically improve the quality of our politicians somehow too).
FTPA is an interesting point, since your suggestion (which I'd support as a law) is akin to what the Act was attempting, by codifying more rules around election timing rather than relying on convention and governmental whim. Yet it was bypassed easily and both main parties were going to junk it. Why would it being in a constitution prevent that from happening? You could make things harder to change, but they still could be.
Good point
Everyone used to admire the US Constitution but it doesn’t look so good now, with the right to bear arms proving “problematic” and the politicisation of the judiciary becoming evermore poisonous
There is a flexible genius in an unwritten constitution like ours. We could easily replace it with something written and WORSE
Under the current system what is to stop any elected majority government, left or right, passing a law to ban future elections and let themselves remain in power ad infinitum?
In the US it's the constitution. Here ? Hoping one of the Lords, backbenchers, the SC or even good old KCIII would stop such nonsense. It's probable someone would though I assume wannabe Dictator Rishi would abolish the HoL and SC before attempting to replace five with thousand in the triennial act (Amended)
One could take the move to the ECHR.
I think the EHCR is long gone before anyone might attempt this.
I thought I might be in the minority but I didn't think support for banning smoking would be overwhelming.
Support across all ages, men & women, all political views.
Well, it's a ban that won't directly impact on anyone who is currently of voting age.
(Given the nature of smoking, very much easier to start than to stop, it's a neat bit of policymaking to try to stop young people starting smoking at all.
On the other hand, it's a problem that is very largely solving itself. The percentage of fifteen year olds who smoke regularly is down from 25 precent in the late 80's to about 5 percent now;
It's a classic boil the frog policy. As you say, it avoids banning smoking for anyone who had previously smoked - legally.
It is also completely unenforceable.
Not sure about that, over time supermarkets & corner shops will ID more & more people to check they're born before 1st January 2009, a bit like challenge 25 for alcohol now except the age will just keep going up.
So actually it is just a way of making us all carry ID. Great. At least we know the real reason for it.
OK, PB brains trust - what's already dropped out of 'Network North'? I saw the Leamside line has gone - anything else?
There's the Bognor Regis - Southampton road improvements (I suppose both of them are north of the Isle of Wight), which is a distance of 37.5 miles. Which turned out to mean Bognor Regis - Littlehampton, a rather less impressive 7.5 miles.
I'd call it amateur hour, but most peole who do things for love take more care than this.
How long before the flip to "we can't spend the money on HS2 (we've made it physically impossible), and we can't spend it on all these other schemes (they're mostly stupid)... Let's have a massive tax cut instead"?
We already have the M27 between Southampton and Portsmouth, which has just be upgraded to 4 lanes (4 years work) so I wonder what this extra improvement was.
I’m looking forward my upcoming visit to the University of Oxford next week. We have an exciting announcement to make … and I’ll get an up close look at a new approach to clean nuclear energy generation called projectile fusion. https://twitter.com/larryellison/status/1709982050521125224
OK, PB brains trust - what's already dropped out of 'Network North'? I saw the Leamside line has gone - anything else?
There's the Bognor Regis - Southampton road improvements (I suppose both of them are north of the Isle of Wight), which is a distance of 37.5 miles. Which turned out to mean Bognor Regis - Littlehampton, a rather less impressive 7.5 miles.
I'd call it amateur hour, but most peole who do things for love take more care than this.
How long before the flip to "we can't spend the money on HS2 (we've made it physically impossible), and we can't spend it on all these other schemes (they're mostly stupid)... Let's have a massive tax cut instead"?
It's quite interesting that capital expenditure for the North for the future is also being turned into revenue expenditure before the election also for the South.
Potholes are an obvious one.
But also extension to the £2 bus fare cap until December 2024 (previous it was to be £2.50) - wonder why fishy Rishy chose that date?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Most Americans are such bad drivers there might be some logic to that.
It has nothing to do with driving, and everything to do with law and order.
It's more difficult to make a getaway from a bank or store you have just robbed if you have to reverse out.
Perhaps the plan for that one should be to address crime prevention.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
No as ever you are miles away from reality. If in a parliament there are more tahn 50% representatives of Independence supporting parties then they should be able to have one referendum per parliament if they wish. It is called democracy.
If you want the ability to call a referendum every Holyrood Parliament then you need to persuade Westminster to legislate to that effect
Go on. Knock yourselves out. Have a bash
Yousaf himself said as FM the SNP winning a majority of MPs in Scotland at the next UK general election would be the mandate for independence now.
Based on last night's by election result swing a likely PM Starmer could therefore dismiss the SNP and pro independence Scots for the entirety of the next parliament the day after the general election
Did you see this yesterday?
“Irish unity poll not even on horizon, says Sir Keir Starmer” By Gareth Gordon BBC News NI political correspondent”
OK, PB brains trust - what's already dropped out of 'Network North'? I saw the Leamside line has gone - anything else?
There's the Bognor Regis - Southampton road improvements (I suppose both of them are north of the Isle of Wight), which is a distance of 37.5 miles. Which turned out to mean Bognor Regis - Littlehampton, a rather less impressive 7.5 miles.
I'd call it amateur hour, but most peole who do things for love take more care than this.
How long before the flip to "we can't spend the money on HS2 (we've made it physically impossible), and we can't spend it on all these other schemes (they're mostly stupid)... Let's have a massive tax cut instead"?
We already have the M27 between Southampton and Portsmouth, which has just be upgraded to 4 lanes (4 years work) so I wonder what this extra improvement was.
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
I assume you were there given your certainty? The allegations from the complainants perspective were more than saying pet and touching an elbow. "Stroking her hand", "Arm round the waist", "Pulling her towards him".
I completely agree that even if correct that is still significantly below the threshold for sexual assault but still quite different to just saying pet.
Due to my disabilities consequent upon my ‘complaint’ and the operation I had some 12 months ago I have carers, mainly female, of varying ages from early 20’s to early 50’s. Invariably at some stage of what can be quite intimate procedures they address me as ‘darling’, ‘sweetheart’ or similar. Should I complain?
The change in terminology is interesting.
Most of the staff in my local hospital I have met now seem to use "my lovely", which I had not heard until quite recently. Not sure where it originates from, but some administrator may have been triggered by "duck" or a politi-tantrum come in from somewhere about previous terms.
Having had a routine blood test in Monday, I see they now talk about "breast / chest feeding" too - on the rolling information system.
And yes - they have a rainbow crossing on the grounds outside the entrance that was formerly a zebra.
I’ve had ‘my lovely’ too. As someone else said, it’s Cornish or Devonian.
The male carers I’ve had use my name or ‘mate’. Or, occasionally, ‘sir’.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke, but if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.
Thankyou. The inability of PB to see all this is quite something
Let's breakdown what you have replied to and seem to have completely failed to grasp:
a) 'if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.'
Yep, don't think many will disagree with that.
b) 'I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke'
And you totally ignored that when saying thank you and saying 'The inability of PB to see all this is quite something'
We all do see it. We all recognise there is woke stuff out there, but the rest of the world isn't consumed by it like you are and believe it is bringing the end of civilisation. It happens, have a rant, get over it. It isn't anywhere near as important as you think.
AI will end civilisation as we know it long before Woke
If you want to know what obsesses me, it’s AI. Just take a stroll through the latest developments in the last 6 months. Exhilarating but momentously scary
PB seems to believe that because I can bang on about something I am obsessed with it. This is not the case; it’s more the case that I’m voluble and like debates and I like to provoke - on multiple subjects
Wokeness is a serious concern of mine, as is climate change, UAPs, the new use of psychedelics, English cricket, the rewilding of the lynx, the mainstreaming of kink, the underpayment of poets, border castles, hiccup cures, scooter diving, capers, and the correct recipe for laksa
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
You can offer equality before the law. But trying to achieve a world in which all subgroups of society are represented equally in each profession or endeavour - 50% of oil rig workers are women, or 20% of farmers are from ethnic minorities, or 95% of civil servants are heterosexual, or 80% of actors in adverts are white, or each county contains exactly the same ethnic mix as the next - is not only unachievable, it's not clear why you would want to achieve it.
ChatGPT can now, also, look at photos you upload. It will discuss them and describe them
The ability is astonishing
I showed it one photo of my hotel room with my laptop, with the screen showing - and on the screen was a Twitter chat about the capabilities of ChatGPT
I showed the photo to ChatGPT and asked what it could see and it replied:
“The photo shows a luxury hotel room with elegant furniture of wood and bamboo. It seems to be in the tropics, perhaps somewhere like the Seychelles or the Maldives. On the hardwood table is a laptop with the screen showing a Twitter discussion about the new new multi-modalities of ChatGPT such as voice recognition and photo uploads. One person is arguing that these new capacities are not revolutionary while someone else is arguing that they are evidence of Artificial Intelligence…”
That was its reply. And this is the kicker: It gave me that reply after looking at the photo for about 1 second
Mind fuck
That is impressive but the speed isn't surprising. A computer can generally either do things fast, or not at all.
Your generally is doing a lot of work there. It depends what you include in the scope of "general". What I would say is that, if a computer can do something, you can normally speed up the operation almost as much as you like by adding more resource to the operation - although, there are limits, depending on how parallelizable the task is.
Most 10-day weather forecasts take about six hours for the forecast run to complete, and this is because any extra computing resources are put into making the forecast more detailed (and hopefully accurate) rather than faster.
Long climate model prediction runs take months of time on the supercomputer. Similarly many data transfer tasks between computers, or data analysis. I came across one daily KPI task that people struggled to keep running in less than 24 hours.
I think the shower in this case is reasonably impressive. There must be some clever work behind that to either parallelize a large computation, or to have done a lot of pre-processing so that the analysis of new photos is simplified as far as possible. Computer analysis of photos is something that's been worked on for decades, with limited success, and if the algorithms with huge training sets have now solved that problem that's a pretty big deal.
But I wonder what their accuracy will be like, because as large language models they were essentially just bullshit generators, with no regard for factual accuracy.
I thought I might be in the minority but I didn't think support for banning smoking would be overwhelming.
Support across all ages, men & women, all political views.
Well, it's a ban that won't directly impact on anyone who is currently of voting age.
(Given the nature of smoking, very much easier to start than to stop, it's a neat bit of policymaking to try to stop young people starting smoking at all.
On the other hand, it's a problem that is very largely solving itself. The percentage of fifteen year olds who smoke regularly is down from 25 precent in the late 80's to about 5 percent now;
It's a classic boil the frog policy. As you say, it avoids banning smoking for anyone who had previously smoked - legally.
It is also completely unenforceable.
Not sure about that, over time supermarkets & corner shops will ID more & more people to check they're born before 1st January 2009, a bit like challenge 25 for alcohol now except the age will just keep going up.
So actually it is just a way of making us all carry ID. Great. At least we know the real reason for it.
Just the smokers.
First they came for the smokers…
And they couldn't run away because they had Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.
A friend of a friend is a Corbynite, and known for his uncompromising views on just about everything. I have just come across a surprising thing he has uncompromising views on: apparently, "under no circumstances should anyone reverse into a car parking space." Is this a characteristic perspective of the far left? BJO?
Apparently it's 'selfish'.
It's actually illegal in some US States.
Most Americans are such bad drivers there might be some logic to that.
It has nothing to do with driving, and everything to do with law and order.
It's more difficult to make a getaway from a bank or store you have just robbed if you have to reverse out.
Perhaps the plan for that one should be to address crime prevention.
They will get there eventually, but only after trying every other conceivable alternative.
Is your point that SLab actually received more votes in R&HW in the genuinely seismic post refendum GE?
I thought Yousaf was doing ok until last night, as did most people. Such was the shock Keith Brown went into "the voters are wrong" mode, which is never a good sign.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
I don't think there is going to be a cosy arrangement between the Reform Party and the Conservatives as there was between UKIP and Tories at the last General Election.
As a Reform Party supporter I've just received an email which includes the following:
The Reform Party is very pro PR for obvious reasons.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
You can offer equality before the law. But trying to achieve a world in which all subgroups of society are represented equally in each profession or endeavour - 50% of oil rig workers are women, or 20% of farmers are from ethnic minorities, or 95% of civil servants are heterosexual, or 80% of actors in adverts are white, or each county contains exactly the same ethnic mix as the next - is not only unachievable, it's not clear why you would want to achieve it.
The RAF instructed staff to stop choosing “useless white male pilots” for training courses in a leaked email seen by The Telegraph.
In an email dated Jan 19, 2021, Squadron Leader Andrew Harwin, who worked in the Officer and Aircrew Selection Centre, discussed the boarding process where candidates are chosen to pursue certain training courses. He wrote: “I noted that the boards have recently been predominantly white male heavy.
“If we don’t have enough BAME and female to board then we need to make the decision to pause boarding and seek more BAME and female from the RAF.
“I don’t really need to see loads of useless white male pilots, let’s get as focused as possible, I am more than happy to reduce boarding if needed to have a balanced BAME/female/male board.”
Because in the armed forces, you don’t just want the people who are best at flying planes…
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
I don't know if this has been covered but this Country's police/legal system is in a sad state if you can get a charge of sexual assault for calling someone "pet" and touching an elbow to get a waitresses attention.
If his account is accurate then it does sound like the charge was making a McCrory of justice.
It is completely accurate, how can using the word Pet when talking to a women be deemed as sexual assault?
Should the makers of Auf Weidersehn Pet be charged with inciting sexual assault?
I assume you were there given your certainty? The allegations from the complainants perspective were more than saying pet and touching an elbow. "Stroking her hand", "Arm round the waist", "Pulling her towards him".
I completely agree that even if correct that is still significantly below the threshold for sexual assault but still quite different to just saying pet.
Due to my disabilities consequent upon my ‘complaint’ and the operation I had some 12 months ago I have carers, mainly female, of varying ages from early 20’s to early 50’s. Invariably at some stage of what can be quite intimate procedures they address me as ‘darling’, ‘sweetheart’ or similar. Should I complain?
The change in terminology is interesting.
Most of the staff in my local hospital I have met now seem to use "my lovely", which I had not heard until quite recently. Not sure where it originates from, but some administrator may have been triggered by "duck" or a politi-tantrum come in from somewhere about previous terms.
Having had a routine blood test in Monday, I see they now talk about "breast / chest feeding" too - on the rolling information system.
And yes - they have a rainbow crossing on the grounds outside the entrance that was formerly a zebra.
I’ve had ‘my lovely’ too. As someone else said, it’s Cornish or Devonian.
The male carers I’ve had use my name or ‘mate’. Or, occasionally, ‘sir’.
No no no
In Cornish dialect it is “my lover” or “my ‘andsome”
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
No as ever you are miles away from reality. If in a parliament there are more tahn 50% representatives of Independence supporting parties then they should be able to have one referendum per parliament if they wish. It is called democracy.
If you want the ability to call a referendum every Holyrood Parliament then you need to persuade Westminster to legislate to that effect
Go on. Knock yourselves out. Have a bash
Yousaf himself said as FM the SNP winning a majority of MPs in Scotland at the next UK general election would be the mandate for independence now.
Based on last night's by election result swing a likely PM Starmer could therefore dismiss the SNP and pro independence Scots for the entirety of the next parliament the day after the general election
Did you see this yesterday?
“Irish unity poll not even on horizon, says Sir Keir Starmer” By Gareth Gordon BBC News NI political correspondent”
Given that the NI Parliament has to ask for one, (IIRC) and the chances of that even meeting seem remote, he’s probably right.
Incidentally, did anyone else watch David Olusuga’s programme on British History earlier this week, including how Northern Ireland as we know it came about? Fascinating. And horrifying in places.
Is your point that SLab actually received more votes in R&HW in the genuinely seismic post refendum GE?
I thought Yousaf was doing ok until last night, as did most people. Such was the shock Keith Brown went into "the voters are wrong" mode, which is never a good sign.
The scale of the victory is seismic.
So you don't know what point you were making? Fair enough.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke, but if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.
Thankyou. The inability of PB to see all this is quite something
Let's breakdown what you have replied to and seem to have completely failed to grasp:
a) 'if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.'
Yep, don't think many will disagree with that.
b) 'I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke'
And you totally ignored that when saying thank you and saying 'The inability of PB to see all this is quite something'
We all do see it. We all recognise there is woke stuff out there, but the rest of the world isn't consumed by it like you are and believe it is bringing the end of civilisation. It happens, have a rant, get over it. It isn't anywhere near as important as you think.
AI will end civilisation as we know it long before Woke
If you want to know what obsesses me, it’s AI. Just take a stroll through the latest developments in the last 6 months. Exhilarating but momentously scary
PB seems to believe that because I can bang on about something I am obsessed with it. This is not the case; it’s more the case that I’m voluble and like debates and I like to provoke - on multiple subjects
Wokeness is a serious concern of mine, as is climate change, UAPs, the new use of psychedelics, English cricket, the rewilding of the lynx, the mainstreaming of kink, the underpayment of poets, border castles, hiccup cures, scooter diving, capers, and the correct recipe for laksa
AI is in a different higher league
Ian Bremmer did a very interesting TED Talk on the rise of the next global superpower. The Digital Order, run by tech companies and not governments.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
Humanity can be usefully divided into individuals.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
Is your point that SLab actually received more votes in R&HW in the genuinely seismic post refendum GE?
I thought Yousaf was doing ok until last night, as did most people. Such was the shock Keith Brown went into "the voters are wrong" mode, which is never a good sign.
The scale of the victory is seismic.
So you don't know what point you were making? Fair enough.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
No as ever you are miles away from reality. If in a parliament there are more tahn 50% representatives of Independence supporting parties then they should be able to have one referendum per parliament if they wish. It is called democracy.
If you want the ability to call a referendum every Holyrood Parliament then you need to persuade Westminster to legislate to that effect
Go on. Knock yourselves out. Have a bash
Yousaf himself said as FM the SNP winning a majority of MPs in Scotland at the next UK general election would be the mandate for independence now.
Based on last night's by election result swing a likely PM Starmer could therefore dismiss the SNP and pro independence Scots for the entirety of the next parliament the day after the general election
Did you see this yesterday?
“Irish unity poll not even on horizon, says Sir Keir Starmer” By Gareth Gordon BBC News NI political correspondent”
Given that the NI Parliament has to ask for one, (IIRC) and the chances of that even meeting seem remote, he’s probably right.
Incidentally, did anyone else watch David Olusuga’s programme on British History earlier this week, including how Northern Ireland as we know it came about? Fascinating. And horrifying in places.
I caught a bit of it (As you tend to do whilst looking after a 17 month old), will have to watch the whole thing at some point.
The president of the most powerful conservative legal group in the country says banning birth control is at the top of his wishlist:
“We are on a winning trajectory...It may be that the day will come when people say the birth-control pill was a mistake.”
Waiting for someone to call the contraceptive pill 'woke'...
And these idiots have the gall to speak of "freedom".
That's rubbish. They are massively keen on freedom. Their own, that is. 'Freedom' for other people, particularly groups they don't like or care about, is unimportant.
The president of the most powerful conservative legal group in the country says banning birth control is at the top of his wishlist:
“We are on a winning trajectory...It may be that the day will come when people say the birth-control pill was a mistake.”
Oh it won't be banned. Just banned for the 'wrong' sort of people (ie, not them). They don't want birth control, until their daughter comes home one evening and tearfully makes a confession that she really didn't mean to, but her and the boyfriend have been really silly and she's now pregnant and doesn't know what to do.............
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
Do please withdraw that remark. I’m right
“Several direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies report how much DNA a person has inherited from prehistoric humans, such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. This information is generally reported as a percentage that suggests how much DNA an individual has inherited from these ancestors. The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background. The percentage of Denisovan DNA is highest in the Melanesian population (4 to 6 percent), lower in other Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander populations, and very low or undetectable elsewhere in the world.”
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
Humanity can be usefully divided into individuals.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
Not really. Leon has a point. There are observable differences in behaviour between say east asians and blacks. Some of it may be cultural but all of it?
Why on earth are you “pro Scottish independence”? Do you want to see the UK broken up? Why?
IIRC you are a staunch Remoaner. All the arguments against Brexit apply - tenfold - to Scottish separatism. For a start it would cause economic depression in Scotland, deep recession in the rUK, and grievous pain and chaos for millions of people, for a decade
How can you desire that?
I know several people who hold these twin positions - ardent Remainerism and pro Indy - and I’ve never understood how they can be so glibly reconciled
I do, for t he same reason I voted for Brexit.
Yes the same arguments for Brexit apply. Which is why I voted for Brexit, and why I support Sindy.
I voted for Brexit on the grounds of democracy and sovereignty. Inside the EU Britain was governed by an unelected elite of Eurocrats in a foreign country
None of this applies to Scotland. Scotland is governed by the MPs we all elect to Westminster (in our national capital), who sit in an entirely democratic chamber with the power to propose, enact and repeal laws
If the Scots decide they loathe the government they, like all Britons, can kick them out at the next election. None of us was able to eject Ursula von der Leyen
And the 99.7% of us who aren't Tory members had no say in the imposition of the Trusster or Rishi.
I have no issue with parliament deciding who has the confidence of the House, that is their role, and we will get our say soon.
It's who they decide on and what that person does which matters.
There is no perfect way of doing these things. It was a point in comparison to the appointment of der Leyen.
I know, but it's not a very good one nonetheless. I agree that point gets overblown and overegged, but that stock retort just doesn't work for me since it requires the idea we should not be able to switch PMs without a GE, yet we've done that many many times. So it just falls flat.
If we had a proper constitution, not something that each successive government can change as it pleases (see FTPA), we could have written in it that if a PM changes mid-term there has to be a GE within 6 months. That would fix that issue.
That might be a good idea, but I do push back at the 'proper constitution' bit. Like most such arguments I think it assumes a codified constitution solves more problems than it does (a bit like how PR may be a good idea - I think so - but some people suggest it will magically improve the quality of our politicians somehow too).
FTPA is an interesting point, since your suggestion (which I'd support as a law) is akin to what the Act was attempting, by codifying more rules around election timing rather than relying on convention and governmental whim. Yet it was bypassed easily and both main parties were going to junk it. Why would it being in a constitution prevent that from happening? You could make things harder to change, but they still could be.
Good point
Everyone used to admire the US Constitution but it doesn’t look so good now, with the right to bear arms proving “problematic” and the politicisation of the judiciary becoming evermore poisonous
There is a flexible genius in an unwritten constitution like ours. We could easily replace it with something written and WORSE
Under the current system what is to stop any elected majority government, left or right, passing a law to ban future elections and let themselves remain in power ad infinitum?
Parliament kinda did do that during WWII, which is why there was about ten years between general elections (1935-1945). So, nothing, in terms of the law as written. But nothing prevents the US Constitution being similarly amended, albeit the procedural bars are somewhat higher.
Ultimately it is only people, and their actions, that are the guarantor of democracy. Not constitutions.
You'd hope that there would be enough opposition to abolishing elections that 326 individuals elected to the Commons wouldn't be able to convince everyone else to go along with it.
This is one of the reasons why you need an active electorate who engage with the democratic process more broadly than simply voting at an election once every five years, as it is those less formal elements of democracy - debate, dissent, etc - that are more important than formal rules.
Russia, after all, still goes through the formal process of elections, but few people would argue it makes them a democracy, because the freedom to dissent is much diminished.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
You can offer equality before the law. But trying to achieve a world in which all subgroups of society are represented equally in each profession or endeavour - 50% of oil rig workers are women, or 20% of farmers are from ethnic minorities, or 95% of civil servants are heterosexual, or 80% of actors in adverts are white, or each county contains exactly the same ethnic mix as the next - is not only unachievable, it's not clear why you would want to achieve it.
The RAF instructed staff to stop choosing “useless white male pilots” for training courses in a leaked email seen by The Telegraph.
In an email dated Jan 19, 2021, Squadron Leader Andrew Harwin, who worked in the Officer and Aircrew Selection Centre, discussed the boarding process where candidates are chosen to pursue certain training courses. He wrote: “I noted that the boards have recently been predominantly white male heavy.
“If we don’t have enough BAME and female to board then we need to make the decision to pause boarding and seek more BAME and female from the RAF.
“I don’t really need to see loads of useless white male pilots, let’s get as focused as possible, I am more than happy to reduce boarding if needed to have a balanced BAME/female/male board.”
Because in the armed forces, you don’t just want the people who are best at flying planes…
Aircrew selection can't find the "best", however that is defined. They only get people for three days in total and it's impossible to tell if any random young person is going to be a brilliant stick-and-rudder pilot or not in that time.
You only really get a view on the who the really good punters are when they've been on EFT for while. That is, when they are actually flying and fighting a relatively high performance aircraft.
At selection they are just looking for people with no worse than average eyesight, co-ordination, spacial perception, memory, etc. who can get along with people, aren't a security risk and won't bail on the training or crack under stress.
You still get the same number of aircrew out of the system at the other end so any demographic conditioning of the intake has absolutely zero effect on the capability or capacity of the fighting service.
Historically, the aircrew selection system has not tried to find the best anyway. It has a great systemic bias for privately educated gentleman thugs (remind you of anyone?) so it needs some positive discrimination to redress that.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
Yes, but at a super majority of 60% or something.
Supermajority my arse, rigged you mean. Just what you would expect from a bent undemocratic unionist.
I found it interesting that none of the experts (no, I'm not being sarcastic) on PB got anywhere near getting last night's result right - I believe the winner had a Labour majority of around 5-6,000, whereas in fact it was nearly 9,000? Maybe this indicates that folk are being too cautious about the prospect of a large Labour majority at the GE.
I've been in Labour Landslide club for quite a while and I didn't expect a win of that size, so yes. There's a betfair market up now on GE seats so you can bet on the big win (rather than just the win) before every man and his dog starts to think the same. That's what I'm doing.
My base case is labour majority of 250 at next election. Tories are despised even in the red wall.
This is the thing that I don't think, with respect, some pb ers really quite get. People like @Casino_Royale. The tories are despised across vast swathes of the country, even by people who would normally be attracted by them.
My Surrey tory lady friend, lifelong voter, told me this week she will not be voting for them at the next election. The final straw for her was Suella Braverman's latest hate-filled tirade. Said lady says she has never felt this way in her life.
Prepare for a night even more memorable than 1997.
Talking of anecdotes I was walking along the shoreline in Villefranche last night and at one of the restaurants I heard this female Ausralian voice tell her companions 'I'm not going to the UK it's too difficult now they've joined Brexit'
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
Historically, the aircrew selection system has not tried to find the best anyway. It has a great systemic bias for privately educated gentleman thugs (remind you of anyone?) so it needs some positive discrimination to redress that.
Hard to imagine even a greased Boris fitting into a cockpit.....
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
Possibly also if there is a major constitutional change. Membership of the EU was a major argument for the No campaign and ridiculed the Yes campaign (possibly correctly) for claiming they could easily rejoin. Scotland also voted heavily for staying in the EU. I think these two related points justify a re-vote regardless of time.
No, they don't. They only thing that justifies a new vote is whether the people want one. That EU referendum fact might (or might not) have motivated some people to want a new referendum, but we shouldn't confuse cause with effect. All that matters is that this is up to the people, not up some elite to define what conditions should be in place first before the people get to decide.
I agree it is up to the people, but you can't have a vote every 5 minutes so a time limit is appropriate. However that time limit should be able to be broken if there is a fundamental constitutional change impacting the people of Scotland. It will be arguable as to what is a fundamental change and I can't think of many, but leaving the EU surely was one.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
Possibly also if there is a major constitutional change. Membership of the EU was a major argument for the No campaign and ridiculed the Yes campaign (possibly correctly) for claiming they could easily rejoin. Scotland also voted heavily for staying in the EU. I think these two related points justify a re-vote regardless of time.
No, they don't. They only thing that justifies a new vote is whether the people want one. That EU referendum fact might (or might not) have motivated some people to want a new referendum, but we shouldn't confuse cause with effect. All that matters is that this is up to the people, not up some elite to define what conditions should be in place first before the people get to decide.
I agree it is up to the people, but you can't have a vote every 5 minutes so a time limit is appropriate. However that time limit should be able to be broken if there is a fundamental constitutional change impacting the people of Scotland. It will be arguable as to what is a fundamental change and I can't think of many, but leaving the EU surely was one.
You can have a vote every five minutes if that's what the people want. Just stop and think about it. If that's what the population wants, then what you want is out of step. So why would you impose your will over the people?
Luckily, this is moot, the people don't actually want a referendum every five minutes. But if they did, absurd as it would be, yes, you can.
Unfortunately due to the malign influence of Adolf Hitler the west has swung completely to the other extreme and now denies any difference at all between the races. In east asia they dont think like this.
If there is a risk of a wipeout, it depends on how resilient the Tory vote is in the borders/NE. I think the SNP could make some gains there even as the cities go red.
Local by-elections showing SNP to any challenger swing at the moment, including Con.
Not necessarily saying that will follow in a GE, just makes SNP-Con seats tricky to read.
SNP under Yousaf are even less popular in the more rural and socially conservative parts of Scotland where the Tories are the competition. SCON more likely to gain seats than lose next year.
you could hav estopped after "popular"
I’m pretty intrigued where the SCONs are going to end up.
Me maw lives in D&G, which has flopped around red yellow and blue over the years - the Tory vote is solid but folk shift between SLAB and SNP.
The feeling on the mean streets of Gatehouse, Tongland and Dalbeattie though is that Yousless is indeed useless and the Sturgeon SNP was a grift. Honestly I think it’ll stay blue, but with a strong showing for Labour.
If there are not massive changes the SNP will get hammered, they are absolutely a bunch of useless grifters nowadays. Whole party has ben hollowed out and most supporters have gone.
A big danger for the SNP will be if they get hammered in a Labour landslide at the next GE, and then think it’s not because of their uselessness, In which case they will have a nasty shock at the next Scottish election.
Even the completely stupid would surely notice at that point.
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
Yes, but at a super majority of 60% or something.
Supermajority my arse, rigged you mean. Just what you would expect from a bent undemocratic unionist.
I think that's a fair compromise, if you want to have a referendum every parliament.
Look what's happened with Brexit - nearly 2:1 against it now, and only 7 years later.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
Do please withdraw that remark. I’m right
“Several direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies report how much DNA a person has inherited from prehistoric humans, such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. This information is generally reported as a percentage that suggests how much DNA an individual has inherited from these ancestors. The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background. The percentage of Denisovan DNA is highest in the Melanesian population (4 to 6 percent), lower in other Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander populations, and very low or undetectable elsewhere in the world.”
Interesting. Reference, please. I believe sub-Saharan African people have the lowest figures for Neanderthal DNA.
Why the focus on Neanderthals? There have been other hominid species. I wouldn't be surprised if you can detect their DNA with geographical differentials as well.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
Humanity can be usefully divided into individuals.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
Not really. Leon has a point. There are observable differences in behaviour between say east asians and blacks. Some of it may be cultural but all of it?
Wow.
People behave as individuals. There are observable differences in behaviour between myself, my wife and both my daughters let alone other individuals or races.
Of course culture is a significant factor in behaviour, as is upbringing, parenting and far more but even within people of the same culture you've got different behaviours.
To divide people into "races" for behaviour is simply racism. Whether its the far left, far right, or anyone in-between doing it.
Might have been a bit braver to include 2005 & 2010 like wot the previous posts did.
My point is motivated voters win elections, even more so low turnout ones. SNP supporters were not motivated, the motivated voters were driven by giving the SNP a kicking, defending the Union and being angry with Ferrier. A new dawn from the party of change or whatever pish Jackie Baillie is currently spouting was pretty far down the hierarchy of motives.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
You can offer equality before the law. But trying to achieve a world in which all subgroups of society are represented equally in each profession or endeavour - 50% of oil rig workers are women, or 20% of farmers are from ethnic minorities, or 95% of civil servants are heterosexual, or 80% of actors in adverts are white, or each county contains exactly the same ethnic mix as the next - is not only unachievable, it's not clear why you would want to achieve it.
The RAF instructed staff to stop choosing “useless white male pilots” for training courses in a leaked email seen by The Telegraph.
In an email dated Jan 19, 2021, Squadron Leader Andrew Harwin, who worked in the Officer and Aircrew Selection Centre, discussed the boarding process where candidates are chosen to pursue certain training courses. He wrote: “I noted that the boards have recently been predominantly white male heavy.
“If we don’t have enough BAME and female to board then we need to make the decision to pause boarding and seek more BAME and female from the RAF.
“I don’t really need to see loads of useless white male pilots, let’s get as focused as possible, I am more than happy to reduce boarding if needed to have a balanced BAME/female/male board.”
Because in the armed forces, you don’t just want the people who are best at flying planes…
Aircrew selection can't find the "best", however that is defined. They only get people for three days in total and it's impossible to tell if any random young person is going to be a brilliant stick-and-rudder pilot or not in that time.
You only really get a view on the who the really good punters are when they've been on EFT for while. That is, when they are actually flying and fighting a relatively high performance aircraft.
At selection they are just looking for people with no worse than average eyesight, co-ordination, spacial perception, memory, etc. who can get along with people, aren't a security risk and won't bail on the training or crack under stress.
You still get the same number of aircrew out of the system at the other end so any demographic conditioning of the intake has absolutely zero effect on the capability or capacity of the fighting service.
Historically, the aircrew selection system has not tried to find the best anyway. It has a great systemic bias for privately educated gentleman thugs (remind you of anyone?) so it needs some positive discrimination to redress that.
Most of which is right, but when it ends up with “why are you sending us white men, they’re useless for our diversity quotas”, then you have a wider problem within the organisation. That sort of behaviour used to be called racist and sexist.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
Do please withdraw that remark. I’m right
“Several direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies report how much DNA a person has inherited from prehistoric humans, such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. This information is generally reported as a percentage that suggests how much DNA an individual has inherited from these ancestors. The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background. The percentage of Denisovan DNA is highest in the Melanesian population (4 to 6 percent), lower in other Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander populations, and very low or undetectable elsewhere in the world.”
Interesting. Reference, please. I believe sub-Saharan African people have the lowest figures for Neanderthal DNA.
They do. For some reason vanilla won’t let me paste the reference link. It is legit
This is also interesting. East Asians can be divided from Europeans for the same reason. Evidence of Neanderthal DNA in the genome
“Higher levels of neanderthal ancestry in East Asians than in Europeans”
So, yes, when it comes to studying ancient human origins - which is quite important - “race” does exist, in very broad terms (generally European, African,Asian - for want of better words)
I don't think this is the end for scottish independence, or even the beginning of the end. In five years time if Labour win, with all the difficulties they will face in government, the SNP will say you have tried the Torys, you have tried Labour, independence is all that's left, and this time it could well succeed.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
Humanity can be usefully divided into individuals.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
Not really. Leon has a point. There are observable differences in behaviour between say east asians and blacks. Some of it may be cultural but all of it?
Wow.
People behave as individuals. There are observable differences in behaviour between myself, my wife and both my daughters let alone other individuals or races.
Of course culture is a significant factor in behaviour, as is upbringing, parenting and far more but even within people of the same culture you've got different behaviours.
To divide people into "races" for behaviour is simply racism. Whether its the far left, far right, or anyone in-between doing it.
Of course you have differences between individuals that is a given. But walk through a black neighbourhood at night and then walk through a chinese neighbourhoid and try and tell me there are no differences in behaviour.
Why the focus on Neanderthals? There have been other hominid species. I wouldn't be surprised if you can detect their DNA with geographical differentials as well.
Yes, Denisovans for one
There have been some remarkable discoveries recently which seem to challlenge the entire Out of Africa hypothesis. Not sure how credible they are yet. Might be bollocks
Unfortunately due to the malign influence of Adolf Hitler the west has swung completely to the other extreme and now denies any difference at all between the races. In east asia they dont think like this.
Is your point that SLab actually received more votes in R&HW in the genuinely seismic post refendum GE?
I thought Yousaf was doing ok until last night, as did most people. Such was the shock Keith Brown went into "the voters are wrong" mode, which is never a good sign.
The scale of the victory is seismic.
If you thought that clown was doing ok then your head must be up your arse or you live on the other side of the world.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
Humanity can be usefully divided into individuals.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
Not really. Leon has a point. There are observable differences in behaviour between say east asians and blacks. Some of it may be cultural but all of it?
Wow.
People behave as individuals. There are observable differences in behaviour between myself, my wife and both my daughters let alone other individuals or races.
Of course culture is a significant factor in behaviour, as is upbringing, parenting and far more but even within people of the same culture you've got different behaviours.
To divide people into "races" for behaviour is simply racism. Whether its the far left, far right, or anyone in-between doing it.
By your definition it's simply sexism to talk about the differences between men and women, but that doesn't make it invalid.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke, but if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.
Thankyou. The inability of PB to see all this is quite something
Let's breakdown what you have replied to and seem to have completely failed to grasp:
a) 'if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.'
Yep, don't think many will disagree with that.
b) 'I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke'
And you totally ignored that when saying thank you and saying 'The inability of PB to see all this is quite something'
We all do see it. We all recognise there is woke stuff out there, but the rest of the world isn't consumed by it like you are and believe it is bringing the end of civilisation. It happens, have a rant, get over it. It isn't anywhere near as important as you think.
AI will end civilisation as we know it long before Woke
If you want to know what obsesses me, it’s AI. Just take a stroll through the latest developments in the last 6 months. Exhilarating but momentously scary
PB seems to believe that because I can bang on about something I am obsessed with it. This is not the case; it’s more the case that I’m voluble and like debates and I like to provoke - on multiple subjects
Wokeness is a serious concern of mine, as is climate change, UAPs, the new use of psychedelics, English cricket, the rewilding of the lynx, the mainstreaming of kink, the underpayment of poets, border castles, hiccup cures, scooter diving, capers, and the correct recipe for laksa
AI is in a different higher league
Ian Bremmer did a very interesting TED Talk on the rise of the next global superpower. The Digital Order, run by tech companies and not governments.
I think your concern on AI is not misplaced.
That was good: I've just listened to it on youtube. Anybody else you like?
I found it interesting that none of the experts (no, I'm not being sarcastic) on PB got anywhere near getting last night's result right - I believe the winner had a Labour majority of around 5-6,000, whereas in fact it was nearly 9,000? Maybe this indicates that folk are being too cautious about the prospect of a large Labour majority at the GE.
I've been in Labour Landslide club for quite a while and I didn't expect a win of that size, so yes. There's a betfair market up now on GE seats so you can bet on the big win (rather than just the win) before every man and his dog starts to think the same. That's what I'm doing.
My base case is labour majority of 250 at next election. Tories are despised even in the red wall.
This is the thing that I don't think, with respect, some pb ers really quite get. People like @Casino_Royale. The tories are despised across vast swathes of the country, even by people who would normally be attracted by them.
My Surrey tory lady friend, lifelong voter, told me this week she will not be voting for them at the next election. The final straw for her was Suella Braverman's latest hate-filled tirade. Said lady says she has never felt this way in her life.
Prepare for a night even more memorable than 1997.
Talking of anecdotes I was walking along the shoreline in Villefranche last night and at one of the restaurants I heard this female Ausralian voice tell her companions 'I'm not going to the UK it's too difficult now they've joined Brexit'
So how is it any different for Australians than prior to Brexit ?
You missed my earlier nuanced comments. I believe Scotland was rightly allowed a referendum (after electing a Nat government) but after voting No the British state has a right to say “that’s it for a long long time”
The two rights must be balanced. They don’t cancel each other out
Yes, fair enough - otherwise you can get a referendum every year until "the voters get it right". Once in 20 years (=a generation) seems reasonable.
More bollox, if 50% + 1 vote for independence parties then there should be the right to have a referendum. You f**king colonial power freaks need to get a grip, the empire is gone.
So the SNP should be allowed to call a Sindy regerendum every week, until they finally get a Yes, at which point there will never be any more referendums again? Is that right? Have I got that right?
Yes, but at a super majority of 60% or something.
Supermajority my arse, rigged you mean. Just what you would expect from a bent undemocratic unionist.
I think that's a fair compromise, if you want to have a referendum every parliament.
Look what's happened with Brexit - nearly 2:1 against it now, and only 7 years later.
So we should make it only a party that gets more than 60% of the vote can be the government. Also fact that you woudl not get a referendum every parliament in any case, doing it for teh sak eof it would soon piss people off.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
I don't know whether calling them races is helpful, but I would have thought you could broadly divide humanity into those three groups. The group of humans who left Africa and interbred with Neanderthals, the group who left Africa and didn't interbreed with Neanderthals, everyone who stayed in Africa (who have way more genetic diversity than everyone else put together).
If you were ever to make any internal categories in the human population I can't see any other categories that would be more relevant, while accepting that these categories have always been very blurred at the edges, and over the last 500 years in particular.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
You can offer equality before the law. But trying to achieve a world in which all subgroups of society are represented equally in each profession or endeavour - 50% of oil rig workers are women, or 20% of farmers are from ethnic minorities, or 95% of civil servants are heterosexual, or 80% of actors in adverts are white, or each county contains exactly the same ethnic mix as the next - is not only unachievable, it's not clear why you would want to achieve it.
The RAF instructed staff to stop choosing “useless white male pilots” for training courses in a leaked email seen by The Telegraph.
In an email dated Jan 19, 2021, Squadron Leader Andrew Harwin, who worked in the Officer and Aircrew Selection Centre, discussed the boarding process where candidates are chosen to pursue certain training courses. He wrote: “I noted that the boards have recently been predominantly white male heavy.
“If we don’t have enough BAME and female to board then we need to make the decision to pause boarding and seek more BAME and female from the RAF.
“I don’t really need to see loads of useless white male pilots, let’s get as focused as possible, I am more than happy to reduce boarding if needed to have a balanced BAME/female/male board.”
Because in the armed forces, you don’t just want the people who are best at flying planes…
Aircrew selection can't find the "best", however that is defined. They only get people for three days in total and it's impossible to tell if any random young person is going to be a brilliant stick-and-rudder pilot or not in that time.
You only really get a view on the who the really good punters are when they've been on EFT for while. That is, when they are actually flying and fighting a relatively high performance aircraft.
At selection they are just looking for people with no worse than average eyesight, co-ordination, spacial perception, memory, etc. who can get along with people, aren't a security risk and won't bail on the training or crack under stress.
You still get the same number of aircrew out of the system at the other end so any demographic conditioning of the intake has absolutely zero effect on the capability or capacity of the fighting service.
Historically, the aircrew selection system has not tried to find the best anyway. It has a great systemic bias for privately educated gentleman thugs (remind you of anyone?) so it needs some positive discrimination to redress that.
Most of which is right, but when it ends up with “why are you sending us white men, they’re useless for our diversity quotas”, then you have a wider problem within the organisation. That sort of behaviour used to be called racist and sexist.
The Polish government think they've got all that they are going to get out of the SMO. Russia's power is dimished and they've achieved most favoured satrapy status in the eyes of the US. It's all downside from here with economic and social costs.
It's possible they also feel under-appreciated by Green T-Shirt. Poland, in particular Rzeszow Air Base, are the conduit through which all the Ukrainian Amazon Prime shipments of 155mm and their thanks was to be flooded with cheap grain imports.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
I don't know whether calling them races is helpful, but I would have thought you could broadly divide humanity into those three groups. The group of humans who left Africa and interbred with Neanderthals, the group who left Africa and didn't interbreed with Neanderthals, everyone who stayed in Africa (who have way more genetic diversity than everyone else put together).
If you were ever to make any internal categories in the human population I can't see any other categories that would be more relevant, while accepting that these categories have always been very blurred at the edges, and over the last 500 years in particular.
What other categories would you create?
Yes we can get rid of the loaded word “race” if needs be. As it seems to trigger the nervous
But we will still be looking at the same thing. Human populations with discernibly different DNA who are geographically separated. What is that if not “race”?
I’m actually much more interested in the multi-origins hypothesis. If that is proved that really is a revolution in our understanding of our own species
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
You can offer equality before the law. But trying to achieve a world in which all subgroups of society are represented equally in each profession or endeavour - 50% of oil rig workers are women, or 20% of farmers are from ethnic minorities, or 95% of civil servants are heterosexual, or 80% of actors in adverts are white, or each county contains exactly the same ethnic mix as the next - is not only unachievable, it's not clear why you would want to achieve it.
The RAF instructed staff to stop choosing “useless white male pilots” for training courses in a leaked email seen by The Telegraph.
In an email dated Jan 19, 2021, Squadron Leader Andrew Harwin, who worked in the Officer and Aircrew Selection Centre, discussed the boarding process where candidates are chosen to pursue certain training courses. He wrote: “I noted that the boards have recently been predominantly white male heavy.
“If we don’t have enough BAME and female to board then we need to make the decision to pause boarding and seek more BAME and female from the RAF.
“I don’t really need to see loads of useless white male pilots, let’s get as focused as possible, I am more than happy to reduce boarding if needed to have a balanced BAME/female/male board.”
Because in the armed forces, you don’t just want the people who are best at flying planes…
Aircrew selection can't find the "best", however that is defined. They only get people for three days in total and it's impossible to tell if any random young person is going to be a brilliant stick-and-rudder pilot or not in that time.
You only really get a view on the who the really good punters are when they've been on EFT for while. That is, when they are actually flying and fighting a relatively high performance aircraft.
At selection they are just looking for people with no worse than average eyesight, co-ordination, spacial perception, memory, etc. who can get along with people, aren't a security risk and won't bail on the training or crack under stress.
You still get the same number of aircrew out of the system at the other end so any demographic conditioning of the intake has absolutely zero effect on the capability or capacity of the fighting service.
Historically, the aircrew selection system has not tried to find the best anyway. It has a great systemic bias for privately educated gentleman thugs (remind you of anyone?) so it needs some positive discrimination to redress that.
Most of which is right, but when it ends up with “why are you sending us white men, they’re useless for our diversity quotas”, then you have a wider problem within the organisation. That sort of behaviour used to be called racist and sexist.
Seen as the good kind of racism though.
Indeed. Let’s all be the ‘good’ racists, that can’t possibly end terribly.
I know two - one male, one female (lesbian). Both with dysphoria. Both lovely people with very supportive family and friends. Both pretty disgusted with and opposed to the behaviour of trans activists. Both loathe the Tories for what they have allowed on their watch. Both despise Stonewall and my lesbian friend, married with 2 lovely boys, in particular is incensed with their approach to lesbians. She sees it as nothing less than homophobia. Quite a few of my lesbian friends have the same view. They think it utterly lazy thinking to view this as a problem of the right. Misogyny and homophobia - bigotry generally - are cross party. No one has a claim to virtue on this and thinking this is solely a problem of the right is the laziest of thinking.
So let's apply the toilet sieve.
You know one male trans person (presumably FTM?). Does this person poo in the men's loos or the women's loos? Do you approve of their choice?
You know one female trans person (presumably MTF?). Does this person poo in the men's loos or the women's loos? Do you approve of their choice?
Because ultimately this is what it all boils down to.
(I'm not sure which pronouns you use for trans people so I'll guess. You're gender critical so you may be using the TIM/TIF convention. I'm old school so I use the MTF/FTM convention. If you referred to the MTF as male and the FTM as female you'll have to point it out)
One is male with dysphoria. Married. One is a lesbian with dysphoria. My lesbian friend uses the woman's loo. She has gender dysphoria. She is not a man and does not consider herself one. She struggles with her dysphoria but has learnt to live with it and is very glad that she grew up before the push to tell boyish girls that they should be transitioned into boys as opposed to just being non-conforming girls. I have heard this from other lesbian friends of mine who don't fit a stereotypical and rather old-fashioned view of what a girl should be.
I have a lot of sympathy with this myself. I was not at all a girly girl growing up but had a lot of Italian female relatives very intent on turning me into just such a person, against which I rather rebelled.
She looks very mannish to some. I can't see it myself as I think she has a lovely warm face. But she has been challenged sometimes in women's loosand is perfectly fine with this because she understands why some women might do this. She considers it wrong to make women worried about doing this.
When I talk to them I use their names. It is perfectly obvious how I talk about them. The only other trans person I know is a lawyer at a firm I have worked with. Male to female and has done the whole surgical transition. Quite a few years ago now. Supported by the firm and no-one bats an eyelid. Quite a good lawyer too. Admire the bravery. It cannot be easy doing it. There is a colleague in my husband's chambers also. He simply wears women's clothes from time to time. He has not changed his name or anything. So no idea whether he would consider himself trans.
The only point I would make is that none of them are in any way supportive of the moves to take away women's rights to single sex spaces/ services / associations. They just want to be left to get on with their lives. An ambition I fully support.
Why then are so many male trans activists so determined to attack women and their rights?
Ah, I see, you are being circumlocutous. You use the word "trans" to describe "a person with dysphoria", which is not how most people would use it ("somebody who is or has transitioned"). But going with your usage, you answered one question but not the other and then introduced two other cases. So returning to my original question and expanding it thus
The person born male with dysphoria. I guess from your description that they haven't transitioned and don't want to. Boys' loos or girls' loos?
The person born female with dysphoria (the lesbian). I guess from your description that they haven't transitioned and don't want to. Boys' loos or girls' loos? (You answered this one - girls' loos)
The person born male who transitioned (the male to female) at the firm you have worked with. I guess from your description that they were born male, had their willy sliced off, and now says they're a woman at work. Boys' loos or girls' loos?
The person born male who crossdresses. I guess from your description that they haven't transitioned and don't want to either. Boys' loos or girls' loos?
The reason why I'm banging on about this point (sorry) is that it is the crux of the matter. People on PB talk endlessly on this subject but never get to the point.
I use trans to mean people with gender dysphoria. If I mean someone who falls within scope of the gender reassignment pc I will use that phrase. There are men with lots of weird fetishes who claim to be trans but I simply do not regard them as such or see any reason why the law or anyone else should pay any attention to their fetishes. Those are private matters.
Other than my lesbian friend I have no idea what loos they use because, believe it or not, I haven't asked and haven't followed them around. The law firm in question has unisex loos as well as male/female ones.
The crux of the matter is that the current legal position is that, whether or not someone has socially or medically transitioned, someone who falls within the gender reassignment definition has no legal right to use facilities reserved for the opposite sex. This was confirmed by counsel for the SNP in this week's legal case. The outcome of the FWS appeal will be interesting - not least because if FWS win then the SNP and the Westminster government may need to go back to court to make further arguments over the S.35 Order.
Such a win would mean that sex only means biological sex - at least for the Scottish Act on Representation on Boards. But this has implications for the EA and ironically might undermine the S.35 Order. So the SNP might get its GRR bill through but the effect of a GRC obtained via self-ID would be largely meaningless. Sex based rights would be limited only to those born a sex not those with a paper certificate. Talk about winning battles and losing wars.
Anyway my head hurts after all that so will bid you good day.
"I have no idea what loos they use because, believe it or not, I haven't asked and haven't followed them around."
One of the greatest statements in the history of PB - not least for its common-sense empiricism.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
I don't know whether calling them races is helpful, but I would have thought you could broadly divide humanity into those three groups. The group of humans who left Africa and interbred with Neanderthals, the group who left Africa and didn't interbreed with Neanderthals, everyone who stayed in Africa (who have way more genetic diversity than everyone else put together).
If you were ever to make any internal categories in the human population I can't see any other categories that would be more relevant, while accepting that these categories have always been very blurred at the edges, and over the last 500 years in particular.
What other categories would you create?
Yes we can get rid of the loaded word “race” if needs be. As it seems to trigger the nervous
But we will still be looking at the same thing. Human populations with discernibly different DNA who are geographically separated. What is that if not “race”?
I’m actually much more interested in the multi-origins hypothesis. If that is proved that really is a revolution in our understanding of our own species
This discussion is plain wrong, in implying that Neandertalers weren't human. Of course they were, and so were Denisovans, Floresians, etc. etc.
The Polish government think they've got all that they are going to get out of the SMO. Russia's power is dimished and they've achieved most favoured satrapy status in the eyes of the US. It's all downside from here with economic and social costs.
It's possible they also feel under-appreciated by Green T-Shirt. Poland, in particular Rzeszow Air Base, are the conduit through which all the Ukrainian Amazon Prime shipments of 155mm and their thanks was to be flooded with cheap grain imports.
And possible that Ukraine feels under appreciated for all the fighting and dying they are doing to keep the imperialist mass murderer's tanks away from the Polish border.
Sensible parties in either country (which the current Polish government really isn't) subordinate such feelings to common sense.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke, but if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.
Perhaps she would be. But still I doubt this by-election result would have been much different.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
They are equal. It's only the recognition of this that needs to be achieved.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
Do please withdraw that remark. I’m right
“Several direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies report how much DNA a person has inherited from prehistoric humans, such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. This information is generally reported as a percentage that suggests how much DNA an individual has inherited from these ancestors. The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background. The percentage of Denisovan DNA is highest in the Melanesian population (4 to 6 percent), lower in other Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander populations, and very low or undetectable elsewhere in the world.”
THat is a lot of bollocks (so to speak). Humans have about 97% of DNA in common with other chimps.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
PMSL at the "decent SLAB leader", he is perfect Labour though being a millionaire champagne socialist. Perfect sockpuppet for Mr Grey Starmer.
Well I base my comment on what I've seen of him and he comes over (to me) quite well. Plenty must agree, going by this result. I mean, he can't be turning people off in droves, can he, let's just say that.
But those shoes with that suit.. Mind you, SKS doing the middle aged bloke in contrasting white soled sneaker thing very much being a leader in letting the side down.
Lol ok.
Hey but what about this SKS switch to the dark open necked shirt? That for some reason I can't quite articulate is working for him I think.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
Ah, so you ARE annoyed by the term Woke, hence this micro-rant. So you are Woke
See. Easy
Where's the rant? Stylistically I was mostly copying what you just wrote. I am totally fine with being Woke. You're the one who can't stop talking about it!
Nothing new either. The Buddha was woke and that was 550 BC.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
Humanity can be usefully divided into individuals.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
Not really. Leon has a point. There are observable differences in behaviour between say east asians and blacks. Some of it may be cultural but all of it?
Wow.
People behave as individuals. There are observable differences in behaviour between myself, my wife and both my daughters let alone other individuals or races.
Of course culture is a significant factor in behaviour, as is upbringing, parenting and far more but even within people of the same culture you've got different behaviours.
To divide people into "races" for behaviour is simply racism. Whether its the far left, far right, or anyone in-between doing it.
Of course you have differences between individuals that is a given. But walk through a black neighbourhood at night and then walk through a chinese neighbourhoid and try and tell me there are no differences in behaviour.
Wow again.
Not sure where to start with this unabashed racism, but for starters what in your eyes is a "black neighbourhood"? Considering that people of all colours mix and live everywhere and aren't confined to ghettos or racial quarters.
My neighbour is black and his husband is middle eastern. Please tell me what sort of racial behaviour I should expect in your eyes from him and how that should vary from the racial behaviour I should expect from his husband?
What does that make my neighbourhood?
What difference should I expect from a street with a retired black doctor living on it and how would that vary from a street with a retired white or Chinese doctor?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
Humanity can be usefully divided into individuals.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
Not really. Leon has a point. There are observable differences in behaviour between say east asians and blacks. Some of it may be cultural but all of it?
Wow.
People behave as individuals. There are observable differences in behaviour between myself, my wife and both my daughters let alone other individuals or races.
Of course culture is a significant factor in behaviour, as is upbringing, parenting and far more but even within people of the same culture you've got different behaviours.
To divide people into "races" for behaviour is simply racism. Whether its the far left, far right, or anyone in-between doing it.
By your definition it's simply sexism to talk about the differences between men and women, but that doesn't make it invalid.
There is a far greater bigger difference between the sexes than there is the races, due to hormonal differences in testosterone, oestrogen etc
But if you start stereotyping that women are one thing or other other, or men are one thing or the other, or assigning certain behaviours to women or to men, then yes that is sexism.
The first US constitution was the Articles of Confederation: "The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was an agreement among the 13 states of the United States, formerly the Thirteen Colonies, that served as the nation's first frame of government. It was debated by the Second Continental Congress at Independence Hall in Philadelphia between July 1776 and November 1777, and finalized by the Congress on November 15, 1777. It came into force on March 1, 1781, after being ratified by all 13 colonial states. A guiding principle of the Articles was the establishment and preservation of the independence and sovereignty of the states. The Articles consciously established a weak central government, affording it only those powers the former colonies had recognized as belonging to king and parliament. The document provided clearly written rules for how the states' league of friendship, known as the Perpetual Union, would be organized." (Links omitted.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation
The Confederation's most important legislative achievement was the Northwest Ordinance: "The Northwest Ordinance (formally An Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the United States, North-West of the River Ohio and also known as the Ordinance of 1787), enacted July 13, 1787, was an organic act of the Congress of the Confederation of the United States. It created the Northwest Territory, the new nation's first organized incorporated territory, from lands beyond the Appalachian Mountains, between British North America and the Great Lakes to the north and the Ohio River to the south. The upper Mississippi River formed the territory's western boundary. Pennsylvania was the eastern boundary." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Ordinance
Among other things, the Northwest Ordinance prohibited slavery in that vast area.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms).
This is untrue. Anyone saying this is stupid and/or a racist. Leon is the latter and probably the former.
Do please withdraw that remark. I’m right
“Several direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies report how much DNA a person has inherited from prehistoric humans, such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. This information is generally reported as a percentage that suggests how much DNA an individual has inherited from these ancestors. The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background. The percentage of Denisovan DNA is highest in the Melanesian population (4 to 6 percent), lower in other Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander populations, and very low or undetectable elsewhere in the world.”
THat is a lot of bollocks (so to speak). Humans have about 97% of DNA in common with other chimps.
For these purposes "has x% of DNA in common with" is a very imprecise statement, meaning very different things with regard to modern primates and extinct near-human populations.
As far as the Denisovans (who as far as we know comprised at least two separate populations as distinct from each other as they are from modern humans) are concerned, the DNA 'in common' is largely SNPs associated with the immune system.
It's a very complex subject, but large scale population differences in DNA don't bear much relation to the concept of 'race' we've had rolling around since Victorian times.
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Indeed, by 2026 Starmer will likely have fixed the economy, introduced a workable and affordable plan for long term care, stopped the boats, ended the war on Ukraine on its own terms and brought waiting lists down to one month for all. However his government will collapse because the Darren Jones vegan wing will be at odds with the Thangam Debbinaire vegan wing over whether venison really is vegan or not.
I am baffled why people apart from Leon and myself can't see this.
Look at America. That’s where we’re headed. Massive culture wars over Wokeness
I really wish this wasn’t the case. But it is. Until AI takes over
Who, on here, stokes culture wars more than you?
I’ve been out in the Maldives with a bunch of people including a well known owner of multiple UK magazines. We’ve had a laugh - he’s a good guy - but he is clearly a lefty and he gets really wound up by the word Woke. It obviously distresses him. Which makes it a successful pejorative and I shall continue to use it as much as I can.
It is also extremely useful in itself. It really does describe SOMETHING - and we all know it when we see it
Strangely, we don't. Some people see it everywhere, a phantom haunting the minds of obsessional weirdos. Others see it here and there. Others see it not at all. We don't all agree on what woke is, or whether this or that thing qualifies.
Anyone who is annoyed, hurt, or distressed by the word Woke, is Woke
There. That’s an easy definition for you
But I'm not annoyed, hurt or distressed by the word Woke. And I am Woke. Try again.
No. It’s not an exclusive definition. If you are annoyed hurt etc by Woke you are Woke. But there are other Woke people who don’t realise Woke is an insult, because they’re stupid, so they don’t get hurt offended etc. I guess you’re one of them?
Of course it's not an insult. It is a word created by Woke people to describe the act of being Woke, which they consider to be a good thing. It was subsequently picked up be people opposed to things like equality and racial justice, who consider Woke to be a bad thing, who have tried to make it an insult. Low grade basic reactionaries who get annoyed and hurt by Woke because they're stupid or perhaps feel threatened buy into this shit. I guess you're one of them?
The thing is do you think equality is ever achievable. That men or women can be completely equal or the races completely equal. Sometimes measures to achieve equality can cause more harm than good.
"Races" don't exist. People from different "races" are completely equal because there's no substance to how people have been divided into different "races".
Except that, genetically, there is
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
Humanity can be usefully divided into individuals.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
Not really. Leon has a point. There are observable differences in behaviour between say east asians and blacks. Some of it may be cultural but all of it?
Wow.
People behave as individuals. There are observable differences in behaviour between myself, my wife and both my daughters let alone other individuals or races.
Of course culture is a significant factor in behaviour, as is upbringing, parenting and far more but even within people of the same culture you've got different behaviours.
To divide people into "races" for behaviour is simply racism. Whether its the far left, far right, or anyone in-between doing it.
Of course you have differences between individuals that is a given. But walk through a black neighbourhood at night and then walk through a chinese neighbourhoid and try and tell me there are no differences in behaviour.
Wow again.
Not sure where to start with this unabashed racism, but for starters what in your eyes is a "black neighbourhood"? Considering that people of all colours mix and live everywhere and aren't confined to ghettos or racial quarters.
My neighbour is black and his husband is middle eastern. Please tell me what sort of racial behaviour I should expect in your eyes from him and how that should vary from the racial behaviour I should expect from his husband?
What does that make my neighbourhood?
What difference should I expect from a street with a retired black doctor living on it and how would that vary from a street with a retired white or Chinese doctor?
There’s a concealed warning here for Labour. Which they won’t heed in their justified glee over a triumphant victory
The SNP, inter alia, are a cautionary tale of what happens to a left wing party that gets consumed by identity politics and Wokeness. In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you
I fully expect Labour to follow the SNP’s example when they reach power. They too are drenched in The Woke
You say 'In the end the voters get sick of it and dump you' referring to woke.
After all these years of posting about woke here there are only 2 of you for whom this is a major issue. The rest of us think your obsession is bonkers, I suspect that is true for the rest of the population.
What will probably bring down a Labour government is what brings down all Governments. They get complacent, corruption, cockups, the voters want a change, etc, etc
Woke will be 99 in a list of 100 reasons.
You are obsessed. And that is coming from me who detests wokeness.
This is a really dumb take when Woke issues have obviously contributed, in a major way, to the problems of the SNP
1. Their obsession with Woke gender woo has turned off a lot of voters and activists and caused bitter infighting (cf Joanna Cherry)
2. Their overall Wokeness means they chose the worse Woke candidate for leader - Yousaf - over the obviously superior but decidedly non woke Forbes
So, yes, woke was a big thing in this election. Its probably the first UK election where that has been the case
There will be more. Starmer js quite Woke and his party is often super Woke. Yet the voters are not. I spy trouble ahead (but only after Starmer romps home with a majority)
Time For A Change, the SNP's legal problems, loss of Big Beast Sturgeon, CoL crisis, Indy receding in near term salience, decent SLAB leader, reassuring UKLAB leader, Unionist tactical voting. These are the drivers. 'Woke' (and wtf is that?) is on the margins at most. You'd need to be obsessed with that issue to think otherwise. So I'm surprised to see it from you.
I'm generally in the camp of believing Leon overestimates the effect of Woke, but if it weren't for the divisions over trans rights then Joanna Cherry would now be leader of the SNP and First Minister. That is a big factor.
I think people misunderstand - or choose to ignore the impact of “woke”. While competition in sports doesn’t affect many, the concept of “fairness” is well understood - and hulking blokes towering over female competitors on the winners podiums will strike many as unfair.
Similarly the gendocrats required mantra that “trans women are women” will strike many as nonsense, and if a politician claims “of course a woman can have a penis” then what other rubbish will they believe?
The hysterical reaction to “men are men and women are women” just shows how isolated in their upper middle class bubble some people are.
That women (slightly over half the population) should be denied single sex spaces because some men say so will not end well. For those men.
Comments
Are these day/night games all going to favour the team winning the toss and electing to field?
In any event, the Crown remains the ultimate back stop to prevent such change.
In fact the UK DOES have a written constitution, it is just not written down in one place, but comprises a very large body of legislation, common law and conventions.
So a coup could occur but would probably be illegal, which may not be much comfort, of course.
I’m looking forward my upcoming visit to the University of Oxford next week. We have an exciting announcement to make … and I’ll get an up close look at a new approach to clean nuclear energy generation called projectile fusion.
https://twitter.com/larryellison/status/1709982050521125224
Potholes are an obvious one.
But also extension to the £2 bus fare cap until December 2024 (previous it was to be £2.50) - wonder why fishy Rishy chose that date?
Hail Mary Passes are now up to over 100.
The male carers I’ve had use my name or ‘mate’. Or, occasionally, ‘sir’.
If you want to know what obsesses me, it’s AI. Just take a stroll through the latest developments in the last 6 months. Exhilarating but momentously scary
PB seems to believe that because I can bang on
about something I am obsessed with it. This is not the case; it’s more the case that I’m voluble and like debates and I like to provoke - on multiple subjects
Wokeness is a serious concern of mine, as is climate change, UAPs, the new use of psychedelics, English cricket, the rewilding of the lynx, the mainstreaming of kink, the underpayment of poets, border castles, hiccup cures, scooter diving, capers, and the correct recipe for laksa
AI is in a different higher league
Most 10-day weather forecasts take about six hours for the forecast run to complete, and this is because any extra computing resources are put into making the forecast more detailed (and hopefully accurate) rather than faster.
Long climate model prediction runs take months of time on the supercomputer. Similarly many data transfer tasks between computers, or data analysis. I came across one daily KPI task that people struggled to keep running in less than 24 hours.
I think the shower in this case is reasonably impressive. There must be some clever work behind that to either parallelize a large computation, or to have done a lot of pre-processing so that the analysis of new photos is simplified as far as possible. Computer analysis of photos is something that's been worked on for decades, with limited success, and if the algorithms with huge training sets have now solved that problem that's a pretty big deal.
But I wonder what their accuracy will be like, because as large language models they were essentially just bullshit generators, with no regard for factual accuracy.
The scale of the victory is seismic.
There is broad agreement that humanity can be usefully divided into three broad races - African, Asian, European (for want of better terms). They are interestingly different in terms of the admixing of Neanderthal DNA for instance. This stuff is important and useful when looking at human origins
It only gets truly stupid, dangerous and pointless when you try and get granular about “the English race” or “the Celtic race” and so forth
As a Reform Party supporter I've just received an email which includes the following:
The Reform Party is very pro PR for obvious reasons.
The RAF instructed staff to stop choosing “useless white male pilots” for training courses in a leaked email seen by The Telegraph.
In an email dated Jan 19, 2021, Squadron Leader Andrew Harwin, who worked in the Officer and Aircrew Selection Centre, discussed the boarding process where candidates are chosen to pursue certain training courses. He wrote: “I noted that the boards have recently been predominantly white male heavy.
“If we don’t have enough BAME and female to board then we need to make the decision to pause boarding and seek more BAME and female from the RAF.
“I don’t really need to see loads of useless white male pilots, let’s get as focused as possible, I am more than happy to reduce boarding if needed to have a balanced BAME/female/male board.”
Because in the armed forces, you don’t just want the people who are best at flying planes…
In Cornish dialect it is “my lover” or “my ‘andsome”
Never “my lovely”
Incidentally, did anyone else watch David Olusuga’s programme on British History earlier this week, including how Northern Ireland as we know it came about? Fascinating. And horrifying in places.
Fair enough.
I think your concern on AI is not misplaced.
Dividing people into races has a term. It begins with rac- and ends in -ist
The plantation of Ulster
They don't want birth control, until their daughter comes home one evening and tearfully makes a confession that she really didn't mean to, but her and the boyfriend have been really silly and she's now pregnant and doesn't know what to do.............
“Several direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies report how much DNA a person has inherited from prehistoric humans, such as Neanderthals and Denisovans. This information is generally reported as a percentage that suggests how much DNA an individual has inherited from these ancestors. The percentage of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans is zero or close to zero in people from African populations, and is about 1 to 2 percent in people of European or Asian background. The percentage of Denisovan DNA is highest in the Melanesian population (4 to 6 percent), lower in other Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander populations, and very low or undetectable elsewhere in the world.”
Edit: six down, and in serious danger of not using all the overs.
2015 30,279
2017 18,836
2019 23,775
2023 8,399
Your point?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiUPD-z9DTg
See also
Ultimately it is only people, and their actions, that are the guarantor of democracy. Not constitutions.
You'd hope that there would be enough opposition to abolishing elections that 326 individuals elected to the Commons wouldn't be able to convince everyone else to go along with it.
This is one of the reasons why you need an active electorate who engage with the democratic process more broadly than simply voting at an election once every five years, as it is those less formal elements of democracy - debate, dissent, etc - that are more important than formal rules.
Russia, after all, still goes through the formal process of elections, but few people would argue it makes them a democracy, because the freedom to dissent is much diminished.
You only really get a view on the who the really good punters are when they've been on EFT for while. That is, when they are actually flying and fighting a relatively high performance aircraft.
At selection they are just looking for people with no worse than average eyesight, co-ordination, spacial perception, memory, etc. who can get along with people, aren't a security risk and won't bail on the training or crack under stress.
You still get the same number of aircrew out of the system at the other end so any demographic conditioning of the intake has absolutely zero effect on the capability or capacity of the fighting service.
Historically, the aircrew selection system has not tried to find the best anyway. It has a great systemic bias for privately educated gentleman thugs (remind you of anyone?) so it needs some positive discrimination to redress that.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/research-news/6125
And here
“Sep 29, 2022 — Neanderthals are known to contribute up to 1-4% of the genomes of non-African modern humans, “
https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals
Just stop and think about it. If that's what the population wants, then what you want is out of step. So why would you impose your will over the people?
Luckily, this is moot, the people don't actually want a referendum every five minutes. But if they did, absurd as it would be, yes, you can.
Looks like Labour got what they needed here to be on track for the by-election win, it seems.
Benchmark to be on track was a 5 pt Labour win, this is a 9 pt win.
https://x.com/Beyond_Topline/status/1710070265336447125
(Usual caveats, local election for local people, chunky vote for an Indy, apply)
Look what's happened with Brexit - nearly 2:1 against it now, and only 7 years later.
I believe sub-Saharan African people have the lowest figures for Neanderthal DNA.
People behave as individuals. There are observable differences in behaviour between myself, my wife and both my daughters let alone other individuals or races.
Of course culture is a significant factor in behaviour, as is upbringing, parenting and far more but even within people of the same culture you've got different behaviours.
To divide people into "races" for behaviour is simply racism. Whether its the far left, far right, or anyone in-between doing it.
My point is motivated voters win elections, even more so low turnout ones. SNP supporters were not motivated, the motivated voters were driven by giving the SNP a kicking, defending the Union and being angry with Ferrier. A new dawn from the party of change or whatever pish Jackie Baillie is currently spouting was pretty far down the hierarchy of motives.
This is also interesting. East Asians can be divided from Europeans for the same reason. Evidence of Neanderthal DNA in the genome
“Higher levels of neanderthal ancestry in East Asians than in Europeans”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23410836/?utm_source=research-news
So, yes, when it comes to studying ancient human origins - which is quite important - “race” does exist, in very broad terms (generally European, African,Asian - for want of better words)
War fatigue has set in – and nationalist populists are stoking cross-border enmity in a brutal campaign for re-election
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/oct/06/poland-ukraine-ally-rival-war-nationalist-election
There have been some remarkable discoveries recently which seem to challlenge the entire Out of Africa hypothesis. Not sure how credible they are yet. Might be bollocks
If you were ever to make any internal categories in the human population I can't see any other categories that would be more relevant, while accepting that these categories have always been very blurred at the edges, and over the last 500 years in particular.
What other categories would you create?
Storm Shadow says hi 👋🏼
That’s a lovely headquarters building you have there in Sevastopol, would be a real shame if anything happened to it…
It's possible they also feel under-appreciated by Green T-Shirt. Poland, in particular Rzeszow Air Base, are the conduit through which all the Ukrainian Amazon Prime shipments of 155mm and their thanks was to be flooded with cheap grain imports.
But we will still be looking at the same thing. Human populations with discernibly different DNA who are geographically separated. What is that if not “race”?
I’m actually much more interested in the multi-origins hypothesis. If that is proved that really is a revolution in our understanding of our own species
One of the greatest statements in the history of PB - not least for its common-sense empiricism.
Sensible parties in either country (which the current Polish government really isn't) subordinate such feelings to common sense.
https://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12864-020-06962-8
Hey but what about this SKS switch to the dark open necked shirt? That for some reason I can't quite articulate is working for him I think.
Not sure where to start with this unabashed racism, but for starters what in your eyes is a "black neighbourhood"? Considering that people of all colours mix and live everywhere and aren't confined to ghettos or racial quarters.
My neighbour is black and his husband is middle eastern. Please tell me what sort of racial behaviour I should expect in your eyes from him and how that should vary from the racial behaviour I should expect from his husband?
What does that make my neighbourhood?
What difference should I expect from a street with a retired black doctor living on it and how would that vary from a street with a retired white or Chinese doctor?
But if you start stereotyping that women are one thing or other other, or men are one thing or the other, or assigning certain behaviours to women or to men, then yes that is sexism.
"The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was an agreement among the 13 states of the United States, formerly the Thirteen Colonies, that served as the nation's first frame of government. It was debated by the Second Continental Congress at Independence Hall in Philadelphia between July 1776 and November 1777, and finalized by the Congress on November 15, 1777. It came into force on March 1, 1781, after being ratified by all 13 colonial states. A guiding principle of the Articles was the establishment and preservation of the independence and sovereignty of the states. The Articles consciously established a weak central government, affording it only those powers the former colonies had recognized as belonging to king and parliament. The document provided clearly written rules for how the states' league of friendship, known as the Perpetual Union, would be organized."
(Links omitted.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation
The Confederation's most important legislative achievement was the Northwest Ordinance:
"The Northwest Ordinance (formally An Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the United States, North-West of the River Ohio and also known as the Ordinance of 1787), enacted July 13, 1787, was an organic act of the Congress of the Confederation of the United States. It created the Northwest Territory, the new nation's first organized incorporated territory, from lands beyond the Appalachian Mountains, between British North America and the Great Lakes to the north and the Ohio River to the south. The upper Mississippi River formed the territory's western boundary. Pennsylvania was the eastern boundary." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Ordinance
Among other things, the Northwest Ordinance prohibited slavery in that vast area.
As far as the Denisovans (who as far as we know comprised at least two separate populations as distinct from each other as they are from modern humans) are concerned, the DNA 'in common' is largely SNPs associated with the immune system.
It's a very complex subject, but large scale population differences in DNA don't bear much relation to the concept of 'race' we've had rolling around since Victorian times.
Similarly the gendocrats required mantra that “trans women are women” will strike many as nonsense, and if a politician claims “of course a woman can have a penis” then what other rubbish will they believe?
The hysterical reaction to “men are men and women are women” just shows how isolated in their upper middle class bubble some people are.
That women (slightly over half the population) should be denied single sex spaces because some men say so will not end well. For those men.